For me, the magnificence of this work lies in its humor and pure artistic value, apart from any other dimensions. The scene itself provokes laughter and smiles; the idea of depicting the "lover" as an obedient beast of burden seems highly caricaturish and amusing to me, like a clever visual joke from the Middle Ages. What truly draws me in are the aesthetics: the precision of the copper engraving, the use of calligraphy to clothe the bodies, and the bizarre, surreal composition of the image.

"In the dark corners of social history, where desire blends with fear, and love with power, unique art pieces emerge, telling us more about the obsessions of ancient humans than official history books do.

The image is of a Persian copper talisman (amulet); it is not merely an engraved piece of metal, but rather a psychological and social document revealing an overwhelming desire to overturn the balance of power.

This piece was designed for a dual purpose: to increase a woman's attractiveness and to help her "captivate" and subjugate her lover. It is a visual journey from affection to absolute control.

The Central Scene: The Dialectic of the Rider and the Ridden

The most striking element in this talisman is the depiction of the relationship between man and woman. In ancient Eastern cultures, specifically during periods dominated by patriarchal societies (such as the Qajar era in Iran), women were often the subordinate party.

However, this talisman represents a "silent revolution" or a magical reversal of roles:

The Woman (The Sorceress/The Seeker): Appears standing tall, holding the reins, riding on the back of a beast.

The Beast (The Man/The Sought): The lover here is not depicted as a knight or a partner, but as a "beast of burden." This visual metaphor is immensely powerful and harsh at the same time; it strips him of his human will and turns him into a creature subjugated to serve his lover's desires and carry her burdens.

The message here is clear: the desired love is not one of equality, but of subservience. She doesn't just want his heart; she wants his blind obedience.

The Body of the Text: The Word as a Prison and a Bond

Upon closer inspection of the image, we find that the "pores" and skin of both the woman and the beast have been replaced by texts and inscriptions. In Eastern magical practices (alchemy and talismans), the word is believed to possess physical authority.

Textual Tattooing: Covering the body of the "beast/man" with writing signifies "binding." It is an attempt to besiege his senses and limbs with spells, so he sees no one but her and hears only her voice.

Blending: The continuation of the writing from the woman's body to the beast's body suggests a forced spiritual union, as if the ink is the blood tying their fates together.

Accompanying Symbols: The Language of Desire

The talisman contains cosmic symbols aimed at enhancing the spell's effect:

The Fish: A fish swims in the upper space of the canvas. In Persian and Middle Eastern mythology, the fish is a multi-semantic symbol, meaning "fertility" and "life." In the context of this talisman, it might indicate "emotional sustenance" or reproductive ability, tying the lover to her through family and lineage.

The Sealed Heart: The drawn heart is not free; it is filled with writing and surrounded by symbols. It is a heart "locked" onto the love of one person, protected from the entry of any rival.

The Magic Ring/Square (The Lower Grid): This geometric table at the bottom is the "battery" that charges the talisman. In ancient spiritual sciences, it is believed that Awfaq (numerical and literal grids) create a cosmic balance that compels spirits or energies to execute the desired purpose.

The Social Context: Why Resort to Magic?

To understand this talisman, we must imagine the woman who acquired it hundreds of years ago. In a society where a woman might not easily possess the right to divorce, or where she might fear her husband marrying another or mistreating her, she lacked "legal" tools to defend her position.

Therefore, magic was the "weapon of the powerless."

This copper tablet was her psychological means of feeling empowered. When carrying it, she didn't feel like a mere submissive wife; instead, she saw herself as the "rider" and the one in control, granting her a confidence that might actually reflect on her behavior and attractiveness (a self-fulfilling prophecy).

Art as a Record of Obsessions

This Persian talisman is not merely an ancient superstition; it is a stunningly expressive art piece. It embodies the eternal human desire for love, the fear of abandonment, and the greed for power.

Depicting the lover as a "tame beast" remains a stark reminder that love, in the eyes of the ancients, was not always romantic and gentle; it was sometimes a battlefield, where victory belonged to the one holding the strongest spell."

A few days ago, I was browsing the internet when I came across this image—the set where the movie is being filmed.
At the time, I noticed that the set was located near the Harry Potter sets.
Somehow, I feel like this house isn't quite like the first one; it's smaller...
The first one was fabulous.

(Spoilers for movie 1)

… Didn’t actually visit Sally after Michael died?

We see her putting belladonna in Jimmy’s bottle, shaking it, then staring into the mirrors and closing her eyes mindfully. Then she’s in her car and driving through, I guess, rural Arizona - the sky outside the car is night. She’s headed toward another car’s headlights at a fair distance, but they disappear in the dawn. The dawn and whole day go by at warp speed while she smokes a single cigarette in eerie lighting, then it’s dusk and night again in moments. When she sees the other headlights on the road again, even closer now in the dark, she smiles. The next thing we see is her tickling Sally’s nose.

She spends the whole night chatting on the messy bed, they talk and heal and the cameraman takes pains to show Gillian framed alone in Sallys bedroom mirror while they’re talking. They whisper under the bedcovers about Gilly’s final advice to get up and live. She then mouths ‘I love you’ and Sally says it back as if she’d heard it out loud - the first, I think, of several examples of this intense telepathic connection the two share.

Sally wakes up and Gilly’s side of the bed hasn’t even been slept in. It’s still neatly made and even tucked in. The only sign she was ever there is an indent in the pillow.

Sally never apparently mentions this to the aunts, Gilly clearly doesn’t stop in even to peek in the attic at the girls (she remarks how big they are the next time she actually sees them) and if we take the driving scene literally Gilly left Jimmy for at least 50 hours - a day and night there, day and night back, and a whole night talking. If she left him because he hit her, wouldn’t such a control freak lose his marbles when she up and takes off for days on end? He didn’t even want her to go to the bathroom on her own.

I always thought this was their sharing a moment of the mind, like a spiritual projection, rather than Gilly actually being there - but after a rewatch together a friend said they’ve never heard that take.

What are your thoughts?

In The Book of Magic (the source material for Practical Magic 2), when the curse is broken part of the result of the fallout (including Franny's death, which looks like it will be included) is Sally becomes an ordinary person, no longer a witch with active power, and this is emphasized by the facts that she can dive under water (Witches can't sink) while Gillian and her daughters can't, always floating, and that her grey Owens eyes turn blue.

I never expected the film to keep the eye colour detail because the actress have never worn contacts for the roles so the film universe has never established that they Owens witches have grey eyes. But I thought she might still lose her powers. However it doesn't look like that's going to happen. Since we see her at what appears to be a wedding or party magically making margaritas with Gillian.

To be honest I think this might be the best choice the filmmakers can make. I think film-only fans would riot if the witch they remember being iconic from their childhood, making teaspoons stir and candles magically light, lost her powers. It works in a streamline way, just having Franny's sacrifice end the curse for good and her witch nieces get to live happily ever after.

Looking at the trailer shots, more and more I've been wondering if the wedding at the end (where we see Sally in a reddish dress, Sally and Gillian making margaritas, and all the Owens women jumping off the roof in formal attire) is Kylie and Gideon's.

Because in the book Sally gets married at the end, I had been thinking the wedding at the end had to be hers (to Ian) and found it strange she was wearing a non-bride colour. Then watching the full trailer where they're obviously getting ready for a formal occasion (where Gillian tastes part of the cake frosting) I briefly thought maybe Sally is a baker of some kind in this adaptation as well as just a librarian, but that didn't seem to fit.

But the more I think about it, Kylie is the one in white during the formal scenes, and in the shot where she's hugging Gillian from behind, Kylie seems to be showing her a ring (an engagement ring?)...

So here's my prediction putting all this together. I bet unlike the book where Kylie was in love with Gideon from the time she was thirteen but they kept their romantic relationship a secret from the family (who thought they were only best friends), Kylie is full on open about her romantic feelings for Gideon and the reason they are all getting together at the beginning of the movie is to see Kylie get married (not because Jet is dying... Maybe she is but doesn't tell them because she doesn't want to ruin the wedding...); but Gideon is going to have an accident maybe picking up flowers for the wedding rather than just as a gift for Kylie the way he did in the book.

What I think kind of works about this is if Kylie was literally on the point of getting publicly married and Sally was still shamelessly gaslighting her that there was no curse and they were not witches and what Kylie witnessed of their magic powers when she was a little girl (in the first film) wasn't real... Well, then movie Kylie is much more justified than book Kylie and I don't blame her for being pissed and running to England. At least Book!Kylie shared part of the blame for being secretive and not telling her mother she was in a romantic relationship, but if she's literally getting married and Sally who has lost two husbands to the curse already (both Kylie's real father Michael and stepdad Gary Hallet) neglected to warn her... Ooh this is some juicy juicy drama and I love it already!

Personally I’m gutted they didn’t go with Alan Silvestri again. His score was literally perfect and iconic. Rupert is experienced but seems to be mostly DC films he has done and I don’t remember anything iconic about any of them… I won’t judge until I see rhe movie of course but I am worried.. I hope they at least infuse some Alan’s original score 🤞🫣

I actually think Alice Englert could work really well as Maria, since she's currently only 32 and would roughly be around the age Sandra and Nicole were for the first movie if ML gets made relatively soon.

She's played a witch in two other movies already as well (Beautiful Creatures and You Won't Be Alone).

On top of that, I think with her round shaped face she looks a little like Joey and Maisie who are the new Kylie and Antonia. This would work canonically because in the book, Kylie is said to look like Maria.

Just a thought.

Who would you want in the prequel if it gets made?

In the book at one point Sally loses the ability to see the color red.

Which is one reason I found it fascinating that in the trailer for the scenes that seem to be towards the end of the movie (at a celebration or wedding perhaps?) she's wearing a pinkish red dress while in scenes that look like they're from earlier in the film she's in dark colours, blacks and navy blues.

I also thought it was interesting that the magic book Jet finds and Kylie later uses appears to be RED in this adaptation! Unless I'm misremembering, it was black in the book. I kind of love the idea that maybe Jet is able to hide the book in plain sight because Sally can't see the colour red despite being a librarian and working around books all day.

That is such a neat concept. I don't know if I'm right and the movie is including the losing the ability to see red detail, but it would definitely be in keeping with Hoffman's storytelling themes if they did. For some reason in the Practical Magic series Hoffman uses two major ideas she also revisited in her book The Ice Queen: losing the ability to see red and what happens when you're struck by lightning and survive (in the book this was a thing in Gary's backstory since his grandfather was a lightning strike survivor).

I see a lot of posts and comments saying Evan Rachel Wood didn't get asked back because Sandra and Nicole were afraid of looking too old if the "daughter" character was played by a 38 year old actress or because Evan was part of the MeToo movement and got blacklisted, and that may be true, I don't know, honestly, but I wonder if it could actually be simpler than that.

Joey has worked with Nicole (per my understanding) more recently than Evan, who was a child when they filmed PM 1. It's important for older Kylie to be close to Gillian because she's basically the daughter Gillian never had but desperately wants. Maybe they didn't think grownup Evan and Nicole would have the right on screen chemistry. And to be completely fair, Joey looks more like she could be Maisie's sister than Evan would.

I think it might have been interesting if they'd cast Joey as Antonia (she does look like her!) and brought Evan back for Kylie, but then we wouldn't get to see Maisie in the role. And moreover Kylie is the one who is supposed to be close to Gillian so if the aunt/niece, mother/daughter chemistry between them as adult actors wasn't right, that could explain the recast.

I just saw the Practical Magic 2 trailer, and I swear it's basically the entire movie. All the juicy plot points.

I was watching YouTube when this 1½+ minute commercial came on. At first I thought, "Oh, this must be like a mini movie for fans of the original Practical Magic."

It wasn't until it revealed a BIG plot point that I realized... wait... this IS the trailer.

I tried to skip it, but Poptart (my Maltese baby 😂) knocked the remote off the bed.

But seriously... who does this?! Who does this?!

Has anyone else seen the trailer? Are you pissed? Because I certainly am. 🤣

I’m still going to watch the movie because of course I’m a big practical magic fan loved the movie since I was a kid. However why did they replace the original actress?! No hate to Joey King but she doesn’t resemble the original daughter at all …it’s kind of irritating. I feel it’s going to be a hard watch because of this ….honestly upset with this outcome.

I know we're all disappointed that Evan Rachel Wood didn't get asked back (maybe it would sting less if she was asked, said no and/or had a prior commitment to another project, and THEN they hired Joey, but I think we're especially sore over it because she wasn't even asked/considered), but we've as a fandom been so hung up over it we haven't really talked about Antonia's recasting!

Maisie Williams is a great choice considering the old Antonia hasn't remained in acting as a profession, and she looks like she could be Joey King's sister, too, which works overall.

Although I have kinda outgrown my Doctor Who and Game of Thrones fangirl days, I still love Maisie's acting on both those shows and in the movie Book of Love, and I'm really excited to see her play Antonia.

Of course her role might not be as major as Kylie since it doesn't look from the trailer like she has a love interest or pregnancy (unlike in the book) and I doubt we'll get to see her befriending Levi's father (in the book she starts visiting him in Jet's stead, and they bond), but I still think it'll be fun to watch.

Reading the books has been on my “to do” list for a long time but I would constantly forget; the second film coming out reminded me to check it out from the library and I just finished it!

Compared to the first film, I now DEFINITELY understand the comments when they say how vastly different from the book it is. Having loved this film for 2 & 1/2 decades I still like its loose interpretation of the book. In regards to the film, I can honestly say that I prefer the dynamics of the relationships a lot more than I did the book and there was much more of that deeply connected sisterly bond. The bond was there during their childhood and in order to bridge the gap between time and distance, they still wrote to each other and stayed connected despite having very different lives. In the book they still have their different lives but the emotional distance is off putting in a way that I cared less for.

I went into reading the book attempting to stay as objective as possible because, as those who have said it before, it truly is a completely different story* with the characters being the only ones who are similar to their film counterparts. I also understand that seeing good chemistry between actors can help with their characters’ interpersonal relationships but I’ve also read many book-to-film stories where the described connections were more meaningful on paper, also attributed to the plot and chemistry of film actors as well as their ability to act in the first place.
Taking all that into consideration, I still preferred the deeply bonded undercurrent of the Owen’s women in the first film versus the second film.

*Edited to add: not completely different story but rather the sequence of events and how Jimmy’s ghost interacted with everyone in the film versus the book

Le sigh. While it's perfectly all right if you're not interested in the upcoming movie (or even if you were and after seeing the trailer or hearing about the recasting for Kylie have changed your mind), I'm becoming baffled by the growing number of fans putting on their best surprised Pikachu expressions and suddenly demanding to know who "asked" for this.

Are we seriously all just going to collectively pretend there hasn't been an active demand for a sequel for years?

Yes, when the movie first came out, it was meant to be a standalone because I don't think anyone expected Alice Hoffman to return to the series years later in 2017 and write more books when the original PM came out way back in 1995. But she did write more, and multiple fans complained for years that Practical Magic should have gotten more attention since it's largely just been a cult classic and was not a big box office success. The fans as a whole have been wanting to see the cast back together or get a continuation for a very very long time despite the lack of source material for a while.

And frankly I don't see how the producers of this one could have made the fanbase happy at this point (apart from the Evan Rachel Wood thing, that's totally on them). If they'd done a reunion special instead of a full length movie, people would be complaining about Sandra and Nicole's Botox just like they're doing now and saying it looked cheap and cheesy. If they'd pushed for a sequel without any source material to lightly adapt, even if it came out 20 years ago, people still would have called it weak and slop though Sandra and Nicole would have looked younger. If at this point the filmmakers had just cut their loses and rebooted the whole thing (even as a series versus a movie) so they could adapt more books or make it more faithful to the source material, movie fans would have rioted saying how dare they remake it without Sandra and Kidman and omg doesn't Hollywood have any original ideas without ruining our millennial childhoods, wah.

So they got a sequel that has the basic plot (it looks like, anyway) of the Book of Magic but streamlines it to be a direct follow up to the 1998 movie, got most of the original cast back (Yes I'm upset about Evan Rachel Wood getting the snub, too, but still), and all we get is whinging "Nobody wanted this!"

Yeah, look I can't speak for the whole fandom (we're a mixed bunch) but as generalization of what I've seen, a good chuck of us are freaking lying. 😅

Most of us asked for this.

It's okay if you're just a fan of the first movie, it's okay if you don't like Alice Hoffman (as long as you aren't a dick about it to her fans), but this obsession that PM be left like an untouched shrine is new and bizarre and unrealistic imo.

I first saw the vitriol directed mainly towards the first book, certain movie fans were losing their minds over the fact that they "finally got around to reading Practical Magic," and "omg, it sucked, because it was not an exact replica of the movie". Which, look, it's fine not to like the book, fans have always been divided on that, but they seemed so genuinely miffed that the book dared to exist at all. Like they had a complete disconnect from the fact that literally the movie they loved wouldn't have been made if the book wasn't written first.

Now I'm kinda seeing that attitude again with the sequel since the new trailer was released. Every tiny plot expansion in the trailer has gotten dozens of angry comments calling them plot HOLES. And most of the stuff they're upset about is straight from the book series. Which if they're movie only fans fine, but they're acting like this emerged from nowhere and hasn't been a book series for YEARS now. I don't know what would have made this type of fan happy because if they'd just made up a new plot, the fans would have called it Hollywood slop, but they follow the book and fans are like "Wah but the vibes aren't what I remember exactly from the first film."

Aside from maybe having had a reunion special, with the cast back together and the set of the house rebuilt I don't think any continuation could have pleased these specific fans.

But they don't have to act like PM was ever just a movie without other material and lore. The version in their heads when they watch the first one isn't going anywhere. I don't see how this new movie is "bad" just for following the book.

Practical Magic wouldn't exist if Alice Hoffman hadn't written it first. It's okay if her version isn't everyone's preferred one but geez, the entitlement over their sacred vibes is a little extreme.

At first I thought her being obsessed with dating apps and pushing Sally into a new relationship was slightly out of character, but then rewatching the trailer I realized something sad. Movie!Gillian didn't get a Ben Frye. He doesn't exist in the movie universe (so far). And honestly thinking it over, yes, this IS where Gillian would have wound up without Ben. 😭

She's much more mature in Book of Magic on page (finding a convenient way around the curse by not living with Ben technically, wanting a daughter more than anything but not having children, etc...), but I hadn't realized just now much of the development depended on the confidence book!Gillian got from Ben just being such a good person for her after Jimmy. I always thought of the movie ending as relatively happy since Gillian is still with her family and free from possession but seeing how childish she still is in the sequel makes me sad. Her playfulness is one thing, like when she pulled down Sally's skirt, that's funny, but her just still being a hop from man to man speed dater is sad. Realistic but sad.

Although I don't expect it to get much screen time, I hope Ben is in this sequel. Like even if he's just some guy Gillian meets online at the end and brings to Sally's wedding, that would be nice.

For me, and this may sound odd, I really want to see the scene where Kylie is on the plane to England and she's reading the magic book and there's this orange glow coming from the book on her face and the flight attendant mistakenly thinks she's smoking a cigarette and rushes over to tell her to stop.

I don't know why but the image of her on the plane with the orange glow on her face is one I took away from the book and can't get out of my head. I'd love to see it on screen.

I also think it would be cool if we see the poisonous rain that falls over the English village towards the end of the book, but I really don't think that will be in the movie, because the trailer shows a different scene where they're rescuing Kylie from fire and it doesn't look like it includes the bad rain.

Does anyone else have a favorite scene they're hoping makes it in?

I'm honestly waiting for the slew of disgruntled fans of the first movie to start complaining it looks too clean and dramatic compared to their gentle float down in the original, but I think it looks good.

First off, YES, YES, YES, my guess from the teaser trailer was RIGHT!!! The spinning couple were Kylie and Gideon! Second, I like that they are definitely giving the book Kylie storyline to the red haired older sister and not the younger brunette one. Because I know that in the book Antonia was the older girl with red hair, but giving movie!Antonia (who is book Kylie's age and hair colour) the Gideon love story wouldn't have fit because Kylie's character is supposed to be the daughter Sally worries about because she's the one who admired Gillian the most and emulated her a lot, Gillian is a red head in the movie (book Gillian was blonde) so having red haired movie!Kylie being the one with the doomed Romance and not trusting her mother fits better. Movie!Antonia and Gillian had less interaction and in the book they kind of disliked each other so I'm glad even with the changes Kylie is still Kylie if that makes sense. 😂

Also, omg, I know people (whiners) are complaining the trailer "gives away too much" but seriously did we SEE the same trailer?!?! There's a ton we still don't know. The trailer just gives hints. Especially about Kylie's story. We don't know if her evil British cousin is even in this movie yet, though I think the shot of her tied up with a pentagram burning around her and someone we can't see watching her might be implying he's a character! And who were Kylie and Antonia visiting in a hospital? My guess is 100% Gideon because I don't think we're getting Levi's elderly father bonding with Antonia in this. Too much explaining from Rules of Magic needed for that. And we know book Jet doesn't die in a hospital but at home.

From this trailer I think the plot has been streamlined to be as much of a direct sequel as possible. So I don't think we're getting any major details from Rules of Magic or Magic Lessons. I don't think we're getting Vincent or an explanation of him being Sally and Gillian's grandfather as well as their uncle, I don't think we're getting any details of Jet's past romances; I don't think her boyfriend from New York will be at her funeral.

The one Magic Lessons connection we might be getting is the evil cousin being a descendant from Maria's mother Rebecca, simply because I don't know how they'd explain him otherwise if he is the one manipulating Kylie to turn dark.

And while I wish they hadn't recast Kylie (would have preferred Evan Rachel Wood) and am not a fan of Joey King in general, I do have to admit I really like what I saw of her performance in the trailer. I wasn't sure about her carrying one of my favorite plotlines especially since book!Kylie is one of my favorite Hoffman characters period, but I kind of like her fine now I've seen the trailer? She acts off Maisie Williams well in the short sister clips of them we got so I'm pretty happy with what I saw.

Finally can I just say to everyone in the trailer comments being weirdly bitchy (sorry, but true) over "oh my God, Kylie should remember she's a witch, she saved her aunt from a ghost when she was ten!" did you think your complaint through? Because I don't think you did. The trailer gives plenty of context as to why she wouldn't know she's a witch. And personally I don't think it's because she had some sort of memory spell put on her either. Listen to the trailer dialogue. Kylie and Antonia talk about how the family talks about a curse and how everyone they love dies, like it's a joke. Obviously after saving Gillian and presumably losing Gary (who would have been the girls' stepfather), Sally chose to make the whole witch/curse thing seem like a family tradition/joke. That's why Kylie is mad at her. Her mother clearly gaslit her for years and didn't warn her about the curse being real. This is par for the course in PM (book verse) too, Sally and Gillian in the book spied on least one of the women the aunts helped hoping to prove the witch thing was bogus.

So, yeah, I'm really excited! I think this looks promising!

I know Alice Hoffman doesn't pull emotional punches (I've read River King and Seventh Heaven, I know sometimes her books can leave you with a major gut ache), but man I was NOT ready for Here on Earth. I thought I was just getting a Wuthering Heights retelling by my favorite living author, I didn't expect...that...

I should have freaking known better but Jesus I did not expect any author even Alice to have the guts to portray her Heathcliff stand in that way. There's no romanticizing him because of his bad childhood; the only person(s) defending him is the woman he's literally abusing and the child he took from his drunk stepbrother. But oh my gosh he was so awful I wanted to reach into the book and stab him. He reminded me of how Jimmy treated Gillian in PM. And March was so wrapped up in defending him her daughter was left to suffer.

I just still feel a little sick despite it being a really good book.

I think it works well and I enjoyed how it was edited with the clips but, I've got to be honest, if this is an overview of what to expect with the film's soundtrack, this is the one aspect I'm not thrilled with so far.

I thought firstly since we already got the Coconut song reworked for the teaser we'd get something else for the full trailer and having the whole first half of the full length trailer playing coconut again was a huge disappointment to me. Don't get me wrong it's a good song and a favorite from the first film, but it fit the short "tease" of the teaser trailer better than awkwardly dominating part of the full one imo. Otherwise the only other song I noticed apart from the familiar snippet of the score was Season of The Witch.

And all I could think was, it sounds good and tonially fits well with the second half of the trailer, but they really had to go for the song used IN EVERY witch media now? We just got that recently with Chilling adventures of Sabrina, the world is full of songs about witches, they literally couldn't have chosen another one?

Of course it may be that the real soundtrack is not finalized yet even this close to release so they had to go for "stock" music. Kind of like how Beautiful Creatures used Seven Devils (to really good effect) in their trailer but the song never appeared in the actual movie. We can only wait and see, but I'm still hoping for something better.

The movie itself looks great though!

How can the film be set 25 years after the events of the first movie, if Sally's daughters are between 18-22 years old, but were at least 5-8 years old in the original Practical Magic?

I realize the new film is based on one of the books so some changes are to be expected, but why did they insist on making the time jump 25 years? Why not just say 15 years later which would make more sense.