The only song there's ever been plays again: Love.
Game of Thrones Daily
trying on a metaphor
Jules of Nature
cherry valley forever
d e v o n
No title available
will byers stan first human second
One Nice Bug Per Day
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

bliss lane
almost home

titsay
EXPECTATIONS
Sweet Seals For You, Always
Stranger Things
𓃗
NASA

Product Placement
art blog(derogatory)
Monterey Bay Aquarium

seen from Egypt

seen from Canada
seen from France
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from Belgium
seen from Russia
seen from Israel
seen from Bangladesh
seen from United States
seen from Germany

seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from Finland

seen from United States

seen from Australia

seen from Türkiye
@anduriil
The only song there's ever been plays again: Love.
you are not immune to inventing an arbitrary set of rules that only you have to adhere to
Morocco has illegally occupied Western Sahara for five decades.
The shooting of part of Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey in the territory, backed by state subsidies, serves a far-reaching effort to normalize Morocco’s colonial rule: jacobin.com/2026/07/nolan-odyssey-western-sahara-morocco-colonialism
The decision to shoot in Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara, where the Indigenous people can’t tell their stories without fear of imprisonment
The simple act of holding a camera in my homeland of Western Sahara can be a crime. When Sahrawi film-makers and journalists attempt to document everyday life under Moroccan occupation, they can often end up in prison cells. For the Moroccan regime, a camera in the hands of a Sahrawi threatens its official narrative that Western Sahara is part of Morocco. In contrast, when celebrated international names in the film industry wish to capture an ideal picture for an epic journey, and decide that our land is exotic enough to shoot the desired scenes, they are welcomed, escorted and granted access by the same authorities that usually deny us that right. [...] Nolan’s choice to film in an occupied territory highlights the extractivist practices embedded in the western film industry. Western cinema has often been complicit in mining stories and immaterial culture from the global south at a scale no smaller than the material resources mined by the western colonial industrial complex. International film crews parachute in, shoot our faces, clothing, dunes and material culture, then fly off. For them, it seems we are simply decorative elements for their sets and back in New York, London or Paris, they gain prestige, box-office returns and awards. For Nolan’s Dakhla shoot, he appears to have neither sought our consent nor considered the ethics of in effect helping to prop up and legitimise Morocco’s occupation, thus making the space even more unsafe for Sahrawis living under it. He is actively participating in a state-sponsored PR campaign designed to legitimise an illegal occupation.
2026/07/16
apparently the TVL season finale leaked so i think i'm gonna stay off tumblr until it actually comes out because spoilers are flying around
Since the Odyssey is trending, now is a good time to remind people that Nolan chose the city Dakhla (Western Sahara) to shoot the film, which is occupied illegally by Morocco. Many Sahrawis are calling for the boycott of this movie.
I'm pretty sure not many people are aware of the illegal occupation of Western Sahara by Morocco, so I invite everyone to do some research on the subject, especially if you support the Palestinian cause, then you should also know about the Sahrawis who, like the Palestinians, never got their freedom.
https://jacobin.com/2026/07/nolan-odyssey-western-sahara-morocco-colonialism
https://festivalsahara.org/en/the-odyssey-manifesto/
On another note, y'all should also watch this YouTube video of Farya Faraji, where he talks about the west centric/eurocentric retelling of Nolan's Odyssey (very good constructive criticisms) :
Lover Boy Louis
THE VAMPIRE LESTAT 03.06 | "Montreal"
This needs to be said.
So many people seem to be loudly subscribing to this tribalistic "us vs them" version of identity politics that has them projecting a whole lot of their own issues onto media. There's an awareness of how political TV shows are despite the fact that media literacy is at an all time low. So many people are assigning moral value onto media works and so many people have been conditioned into thinking that portrayal somehow equals endorsement.
And because portrayal equals endorsement to certain types of people, portrayal always ends up getting the short end of the stick, whether or not its endorsement. You know, censorship, moralism, fascist thinking and all that stuff.
So yeah, I expected the backlash because this is the bullshit one always has to deal with if you like your shows with a bit of complexity to them.
But it pisses me off that the Claudia seance is being cheapened into another political soundbite about how "the writers just wanted an excuse to be racist."
Do I think people are allowed to be hurt by portrayals of racism in a show? Of course I do. I've been hurt by it since I was old enough to understand what race was. I'll probably be hurt by it until the day I die. It's valid to be upset by something and never want to watch it again. There are plenty of shows I haven't finished because they were too triggering for me.
Do I think that being upset by something gives me the right to assign values onto writers I know nothing about for simply doing their jobs and telling a story? No, the fuck I don't.
Writing about racism doesn't make you racist any more than writing about murder makes you killer. And the fact that lately, so many people can't grasp that is scary to me.
You tell a story about race, you tell a story about racism. Because racism is alive and well. And even if we manage to create a post-racism society, racism will have been alive and well. They're a package deal.
I want people to be able to tell stories about race. I want every kind of depiction about race there is. The good, the bad and the messy. We've been invisible for too long.
And if you think thoughtful media portrayals of racism are just a writer's excuse to be racist and not a portrayal of issues and inequalities that can and have played out in the real world because of the systems of oppression that underpin them, you're clearly unable to separate a fictional story from your own personal baggage and I have nothing to say to you.
These terrible takes about Claudia are extra irritating to me as someone from an African country, who grew up on multiracial and multicultural shows and studied post-apartheid and postcolonial literature at university, media that had racism as a recurring theme, because the narratives, like IWTV and TVL, were about racist structures and the people who lived in them.
It's so fucking painful to realize that the majority of these would be lumped under "generic racist propaganda" on this stupid US-centric website because for some reason people think that a piece of media having racism in it makes it politically incorrect propaganda, unfit to be enjoyed, studied or consumed. Without realizing what an oppressive, imperialistic, white standard that is.
"I'm a good person who only consumes media that is 100% non-racist, non-sexist and politically correct."
Congratulations. I can't go a week without experiencing some form of oppression, from other marginalized people even, because internalized marginalization is a thing and my parents and grandparents grew up in systems where racism was valued. In fact, racism is valued to this day in certain places, but I'm overjoyed to hear that I'd get punished by Western audiences if I were to write about it. I'd be nothing without your erasure.
The scene where Claudia finally gave Louis a piece of her mind could've been a wonderful opportunity for the fandom to talk about how racism is a structural context that marginalized people cannot separate themselves from or how traumatized people can and do weaponize each others' internalized racism against each other.
It could've been a wonderful opportunity to discuss how Claudia was misrepresented because of Louis' guilt and love for her or how female characters, black women in particular, are rarely allowed to show their ugly sides in media, especially when the narrative is told through a male lens. A male lens that's been well established as someone who puts himself and the people he loves on pedestals and continues to view her through rose-colored glasses to this day.
It could've been a wonderful opportunity to talk about the myth of the perfect victim or how her being trapped in a young girl's body means people have "no idea of her strength."
It could've been a wonderful opportunity to discuss how much of that scene was Claudia finally being honest and letting out all that pent up resentment she never got to share with Louis while losing him was at stake (but now she has nothing to lose) or how much was cruel lies motivated by the pain of being ripped from her resting place, seeing Louis and Lestat there together (Louis choosing Lestat over her AGAIN) while she's stuck having to exist without Madeleine.
Some people did speak about that which is awesome. Thank you for existing.
But mostly, it became all about "My morals have been violated" (fine, don't watch it then) and "what Claudia said was inexcusable, how dare she" (you're policing a traumatized black female character, EXCUSE YOU) and "the writers are such racist and sexist meanies for no longer portraying Claudia as Louis' most special manic pixie throw pillow" (??? make it make sense ???). It mostly boiled down to the fact that Claudia was cruel to Louis out of anger.
"This isn't Claudia."
There's literally an episode titled "The Ruthless Pursuit of Blood with All a Child's Demanding". Describing Claudia. From Louis' perspective. The person who has an admittedly rosy view of her.
She's ruthless. She's bloodthirsty. She's cruel.
She's every bit as ruthless as Lestat, whose blood flows through her veins. She's every bit as bloodthirsty as the coven that took her out. That's why they had to team up in order to do it. And she's every bit as cruel as Louis, who we've seen do this type of thing to multiple characters at multiple times. Lestat taught her how to hunt, but if there's one thing Claudia would have learned from Louis, it would be being cruel to people out of anger.
Racism is one of Louis' core wounds and triggers. We see it throughout season 1. Lestat uses the racially neutral term "fledgling" to address him, and he assigns racial meaning onto it, after which Lestat never uses the term again. Claudia uses "slaves" as a buzzword to manipulate him. Daniel uses racial terminology to get him to open up in the interviews. His favorite human meal is Jim Crow racists. Every time he acts on impulse, it's triggered by someone else's racism or perceived racism. It's a core wound so it's the best way to be cruel to Louis. Claudia is a predator and she went straight for the jugular.
Did you expect her not to?
Claudia was summoned to once again assuage the guilt of the two people who were complicit in both her deaths. She was immediately confronted with the image of the two of them together again after decades of searching for and not finding her companion, Madeleine.
Before she died she literally called them out for the self-absorbed bastards that they were, the fact that they constantly used her as a pawn in their drama and the fact that her being made a vampire was never about her, but about them.
She died because Louis refused to listen to her warnings about Armand. And then Louis still stayed with Armand for years after that, the very years she was stuck in purgatory without Madeleine, showed her private diaries to everyone, because her words were published in a fucking international bestseller, read out her most vulnerable thoughts about getting assaulted to her abuser to fuel his own sanctimonious hero complex and then paid a sex worker to act like her.
Of course, she's harder on Louis and easier on Lestat. Louis was supposed to be better than this. As unfair as it is, she always held him to a higher standard. Lestat was always the scumbag she detested (and father she loved in secret) and she never let him forget that. Louis was the father she was open about loving (and scumbag she detested in secret, because she could not afford to push him away when he always had one foot out the door anyways). Louis was the person she had the most faith in and trusted not to fail and betray her. And then he went and did all that. Lestat was just acting like Lestat, but Louis broke her heart.
She is allowed to be pissed and to say whatever the fuck she wants to in order to get that message across. She is allowed to say things that she knows will hurt them, Louis in particular, whether or not those things are true. She's allowed to be in enough anguish to lash out about it where it'll hurt most. Because they'll always have each other anyways.
If your compassion for Claudia stops when she's no longer fitting your standards of behavior, then you're the one discriminating and you're the one with the damn problem. Black women (and men for that matter) should be able to show their ugly sides in media, just like white men without everybody freaking out whenever it happens. Characters should be allowed to be human beings, not paragons of virtue.
Supernatural fans are next level in terms of brain worms. Someone will be like "well we all know the show's production designer Jerry Wanek and how he named the Margiekugel beer that Sam and Dean drink after his mother and so you can see them drink this beer during family bonding scenes--" and everyone is nodding like "yes we are familiar with Wanek and his beer symbolism"
revenge for @tumblchorraden, her handsome tengu desubi!
♥ Welcome to #dakiss26 ♥
Get ready for smooching across Thedas!
♥ #dakiss26 CALENDAR ♥
from AUGUST 1st, 2026 to AUGUST 7th, 2026
♥ #dakiss26 FAQ ♥
Desktop - Mobile
Have more questions? Ask away!
—
Remember to tag your creations with the #dakiss26 tag! I aim to reblog everybody who participates and I will set up a queue to that effect. It would be awesome if you joined me on this! If you don’t want your work to be reblogged here, please say so in the tags!
[Image ID: An image of the quest journal in Dragon Age The Veilguard, with a header that reads: Dragon Age Kiss Week Prompts. Under it there's a column of prompts that reads: Day 1 - Camp, Day 2 - Injury, Day 3 - Courtyard, Day 4 - Exploration, Day 5 - Beach, Day 6 - Mourning, Day 7 - Sneaky. Under the prompts, the event's tag #dakiss26 /.End ID]
if u were a creature that lived in an aquarium what color aquarium gravel would u want in ur tank? or would u prefer a different sort of substrate?
I have put a considerable amount of thought into this, and contacted my brother-in-law to be who is an aquarist at one of Scotland’s popular aquariums.
From our brief conversation, it would depend on whether I’m a freshwater or saltwater creature. Your standard goldfish can roll with inert gravel which won’t leech anything into the water. It’s more decorative, and I don’t think it’d interest me if I was a creature.
Then you can have fine sand for the creatures that like to burrow because it’s smoother on their skin and easier to move. Burrowing would be fun so there’s options there.
Then last one for freshwater creatures is soil which is good for creatures who have plants in their tank. I think I’d fuck with that a bit more because it’d make the tank a bit more interesting and you can still decorate it with sand or gravel.
For saltwater you can roll with crushed coral which looks natural and buffers pH and alkalinity which keeps the water chemistry steady. That doesn’t sound bad either, but the issue is it’s quite coarse.
Some people don’t use any substrate at all if they need the water extremely clean for things like coral nurseries, and it means stuff can get stuck in the substrate and break down.
So I think if it came down to it, I’d like some soil for plants to grow, and some sand to burrow in👍
I genuinely believe that the new SW trilogy wouldn’t have flopped out into irrelevance like it did if they hadn’t dumped Finn on the side of the freeway like a new pet rabbit the week after easter
Anyway in my heart Finn became a Jedi alongside Rey and inspired a Stormtrooper insurrection and Kyle Ron went back to his mom like he should have day fucking one and that angry redhead dude blew up with the star destroyer and Poe got to make it happen and at the end Rey doesn’t give a shit who her bitch ass non-palpatine parents might have been because she gets her new family like she needed and palpatine stays dead at the bottom of his musty hole like he should have and Finn and Poe give each other approximately 130% the amount of lingering meaningful looks and then one of their run-together-to-reunite moments results in a heat-of-the-moment make out like it should have and Luke and Leia meet in person a minimum of once so she can sibling slap him at least once for being a useless dramatic old hermit for a billion years and tell him to get the Chanel boots back on and stop being a sad hobo and then for no reason at all there is an ewok style moon of Endor forest party at the end like God intended
I need a turbo-Nerd to tell me why they dumped Finn like hot garbage.
"Racism"
INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE | THE VAMPIRE LESTAT
Two years ago, the occupation destroyed our home, turning our dreams, memories, and everything we owned into piles of rubble and ash, as seen in this picture.
No one is surprised that Claudia is in some version of Hell, right? She was a gleeful mass murderer who once killed a little boy who begged her to spare his dog. She specifically preyed on people who were trying to help what they thought was a lost little girl. Her being in Hell is the least shocking thing about her afterlife.
And if the IWTV cosmology includes a Hell where number of people killed earns you extra time (and it’s a very Catholically informed universe so that does follow), then of course Madeleine isn’t with her. Her body count was an infinitesimal fraction of Claudia’s by virtue of being a relatively new vampire. She might have already moved on to Purgatory or Heaven. And regardless of where Madeleine ended up, separation from her would make sense as part of Claudia’s divine punishment.
(That is, of course, if the spirit was Claudia at all and not a random ghost pretending to be her to stir trouble and cause misery, which is something random ghosts very much canonically do in Anne Rice’s wider works.)