i've been kinda thinkin bout ch3 possibilities and i came to an idea
what if every chapter has it's own difference from the others?
like ch1 served as a tutorial, ch2 had an alternative route, maybe others will have something different too? (not necessarily erasing previous things. like ch3 can still have alt route while having it's own lil difference)
so, i propose an idea: chapter 3 will TWO secret bosses
i have zero proof to this besides the fact that both Mike and that-flower-character-who-may-or-may-not-reference-flowey have secret boss potential, while Tenna will probably be the main antagonist
A Book of Creatures by @a-book-of-creatures doesn't update these days but is another thing along these lines, really huge, fully illustrated all by the author and cites all sources
I'd really like this Russian project to have an English part of the fandom, so I want to spread it here! AND PLUS! The creators of the project are planning to hire English-speaking voice actors, but at the moment the English subtitles for the first episode are ready, which is already a good thing
I'm not good at attracting people to join any fandom, but at least this wayā¦.. I even draw arts for it sometimes
@probablyautism thnx for remembering the weirdest tumblrina on the planet. also can u explain to ur local grandma what she has to do(apologies are afoot)
@tothechaos will you print and eat the entire post? If so, here is a long joke. Don't choke:
A man obsessed with trains finally steals oneĀ and immediately crashes it, killing several people.
At the trial, the man is found guilty of multiple murders and sentenced to death.
Before he faces his sentence, heās offered a last meal, and asks for a single banana, which is given to him.
The next day, heās led to the electric chair. They strap him in, pull the switch, and... nothing happens.
Thereās never been a failure before. But because you cannot punish a person twice for the same crime, the court is forced to let him go free.
Within a weekās time, naturally, the man, who is obsessed with trains, goes and steals another one.
He doesnāt care that he canāt drive it or that he failed catastrophically before; he is obsessed with trains and his only desire is to operate one. As before, he crashes it, and kills several people.
Again, he stands trial, and again, he is sentenced to death, showing no remorse, only delight that he got to operate the train.
His last meal request is a single banana. When he goes to the chair, the executioner pulls the switch, but nothing happens. He goes free again.
The train-obsessed maniac, once more on the loose, wastes no time in hijacking a train and crashing it.
His trial is speedy, because this has already happened twice, and he is sentenced to death.
They ask him what heād like for his last meal. āA single banana,ā he says.
āOh, no you donāt, you son of a bitch. Weāre on to you, now. We know all about your little banana trick, and youāre not escaping this time!ā
The guards refuse his request, and instead serve him a standard last meal of steak, potatoes, and berry cobbler.
The next morning they strap him into the electric chair, pull the switch, and... nothing happens.
āDid you give him the banana?ā demands the head guard.
āNo, sir! He asked for the banana but we didnāt give it to him, we swear!ā says one of the guards.
Turns out the banana had nothing to do with anything. He was just a really bad conductor.
Quick! Gordon Ramsey has tasked you to come up with a new recipe with a rather special ingredient: 'this trainwreck of a Tumblr post printed out on paper'. You don't have much time as the exquisite guest will enter the doors of your fancy establishment the moment this post hits 200k notes. Come up with a recipe. Please provide detailed instructions.
Bespoke 9 course meal meant to be enjoyed by @tothechaos
Foreword:
As tasked by the prolific Gordan Ramsey, this 9 Course endeavour will feature the post in its entirety segmented into 9 delightfully ornate, unreasonably complex yet delectably unparalleled dishes. In the following, we'll see how to prepare each of these dishes.
Course One
Dish name: 10k notes of Hubris
10k Notes of Hubris is a simple risotto with saffron infusion and forest mushrooms, topped with shavings of the top 9th piece of this post, printed in full colour, regular stock. Due to the nature of a 9 course setting, it is wise to start with a simpler dish.
Ingredients (serves four people):
1 teaspoon of saffron
300g carnaroli rice
50g extra virgin olive oil
20g butter
5g shallots
1l vegetable broth
parsley (to taste)
100g porcini mushrooms
80g portobello mushrooms
100g brown mushrooms
5g truffle oil
5g lemon peel and lemon juice
30g parmesan cheese
thyme (a dash)
5g garlic
A pinch of salt and pepper
The first 9th of this post, printed in full colour with regular stock.
Method:
In a saucepan, pour the oil and the chopped shallot(s), then add the rice and saffron and toast
Pour the broth a little at a time and cook slowly. Allow to cook before adding salt and black pepper. Stir in butter, grated parmesan cheese, chopped parsley, truffle oil, lemon juice and peel.
In a separate saucepan, cook the mushrooms with oil, garlic, thyme, salt and black pepper.
Presentation:
At the base of the dish pour the risotto, complete with forest mushrooms and basil leaves. Shave the printed top 9th of the post and sprinkle on top. Drizzle a dash of olive oil before serving.
The next dish and recipe of this 9 course meal, complete with the next 9th of the post printed and incorporated, will be presented by another chef.
i don't what's more wild to me, how much we are all working on giving someone ink poisoning or learning that @writing-prompt-s has @one-time-i-dreamt 's phone number
Expanding a thought from a conversation this morning:
In general, I think "Is X out-of-character?" is not a terribly useful question for a writer. It shuts down possibility, and interesting directions you could take a character.
A better question, I believe, is "What would it take for Character to do X?" What extremity would she find herself in, where X starts to look like a good idea? What loyalties or fears leave him with X as his only option? THAT'S where a potentially interesting story lies.
In practice, I find that you can often justify much more from a character than you initially dreamed you could: some of my best stories come from "What might drive Character to do [thing he would never do]?" As long as you make it clear to the reader what the hell pushed your character to this point, you've got the seed of a compelling story on your hands.
this connects to some REALLY good writing advice i remember from @batshaped
Characters are contradictory, just like people are. What would it take for them to do the thing they've told themselves they'd never do, and how would they try to justify it?
Good news, fellow artists! Nightshade has finally been released by the UChicago team! If you aren't aware of what Nightshade is, it's a tool that helps poison AI datasets so that the model "sees" something different from what an image actually depicts. It's the same team that released Glaze, which helps protect art against style mimicry (aka those finetuned models that try to rip off a specific artist).
As they show in their paper, even a hundred poisoned concepts make a huge difference.
(Reminder that glazing your art is more important than nighshading it, as they mention in their tweets above, so when you're uploading your art, try to glaze it at the very least.)
Everyone reblog! Spread the word so more and more artists learn that in addition to Glaze that coats art against ai scraping mimicry there's also an offensive tool now, able to skew and poison data pools.
Now poisoning will need many artists to nightshade their art and it's most important to get this ou to those the most at risk of being scraped. Reblog!
This shot through my brain like a chain of firecrackers, so, without derailing the original post, I have some THOUGHTS to add about why this concept is not only hilarious (because it is), but also...
It. It kind of fucks. Severely.
And in a delightfully Pratchett-y way, I'd dare to suggest.
I'll explain:
As inferred above, both Crowley AND Aziraphale have canonical Biblical counterparts. Not by name, no, but by function.
Crowley, of course, is the serpent of Eden.
(note on the serpent of Eden: In Genesis 3:1-15, at least, the serpent is not identified as anything other than a serpent, albeit one that can talk. Later, it will be variously interpreted as a traitorous agent of Hell, as a demon, as a guise of Satan himself, etc. In Good Omens --as a slinky ginger who walks funny)
Lesser known, at least so far as I can tell, is the flaming sword. It, too, appears in Genesis 3, in the very last line:
"So he drove out the man; and placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."
--Genesis 3:24, KJV
Thanks to translation ambiguity, there is some debate concerning the nature of the flaming sword --is it a divine weapon given unto one of the Cherubim (if so, why only one)? Or is it an independent entity, which takes the form of a sword (as other angelic beings take the form of wheels and such)? For our purposes, I don't think the distinction matters. The guard at the gate of Eden, whether an angel wielding the sword or an angel who IS the sword, is Aziraphale.
(note on the flaming sword: in some traditions --Eastern Orthodox, for example-- it is held that upon Christ's death and resurrection, the flaming sword gave up it's post and vanished from Eden for good. By these sensibilities, the removal of the sword signifies the redemption and salvation of man.
...Put a pin in that. We're coming back to it.)
So, we have our pair. The Serpent and the Sword, introduced at the beginning and the end (ha) of the very same chapter of Genesis.
But here's the important bit, the bit that's not immediately obvious, the bit that nonetheless encapsulates one of the central themes, if not THE central theme, of Good Omens:
The Sword was never intended to guard Eden while Adam and Eve were still in it.
Do you understand?
The Sword's function was never to protect them. It doesn't even appear until after they've already fallen. No... it was to usher Adam and Eve from the garden, and then keep them out. It was a threat. It was a punishment.
The flaming sword was given to be used against them.
So. Again. We have our pair. The Serpent and the Sword: the inception and the consequence of original sin, personified. They are the one-two punch that launches mankind from paradise, after Hell lures it to destruction and Heaven condemns it for being destroyed. Which is to say that despite being, supposedly, hereditary enemies on two different sides of a celestial cold war, they are actually unified by one purpose, one pivotal role to play in the Divine Plan: completely fucking humanity over.
That's how it's supposed to go. It is written.
...But, in Good Omens, they're not just the Serpent and the Sword.
They're Crowley and Aziraphale.
(author begins to go insane from emotion under the cut)
In Good Omens, humanity is handed it's salvation (pin!) scarcely half an hour after losing it. Instead of looming over God's empty garden, the sword protects a very sad, very scared and very pregnant girl. And no, not because a blameless martyr suffered and died for the privilege, either.
It was just that she'd had such a bad day. And there were vicious animals out there. And Aziraphale worried she would be cold.
...I need to impress upon you how much this is NOT just a matter of being careless with company property. With this one act of kindness, Aziraphale is undermining the whole entire POINT of the expulsion from Eden. God Herself confronts him about it, and he lies. To God.
And the Serpent--
(Crowley, that is, who wonders what's so bad about knowing the difference between good and evil anyway; who thinks that maybe he did a GOOD thing when he tempted Eve with the apple; who objects that God is over-reacting to a first offense; who knows what it is to fall but not what it is to be comforted after the fact...)
--just goes ahead and falls in love with him about it.
As for Crowley --I barely need to explain him, right? People have been making the 'didn't the serpent actually do us a solid?' argument for centuries. But if I'm going to quote one of them, it may as well be the one Neil Gaiman wrote ficlet about:
"If the account given in Genesis is really true, ought we not, after all, to thank this serpent? He was the first schoolmaster, the first advocate of learning, the first enemy of ignorance, the first to whisper in human ears the sacred word liberty, the creator of ambition, the author of modesty, of inquiry, of doubt, of investigation, of progress and of civilization."
--Robert G. Ingersoll
The first to ask questions.
Even beyond flattering literary interpretation, we know that Crowley is, so often, discreetly running damage control on the machinations of Heaven and Hell. When he can get away with it. Occasionally, when he can't (1827).
And Aziraphale loves him for it, too. Loves him back.
And so this romance plays out over millennia, where they fall in love with each other but also the world, because of each other and because of the world. But it begins in Eden. Where, instead of acting as the first Earthly example of Divine/Diabolical collusion and callousness--
(other examples --the flood; the bet with Satan; the back channels; the exchange of Holy Water and Hellfire; and on and on...)
--they refuse. Without even necessarily knowing they're doing it, they just refuse. Refuse to trivialize human life, and refuse to hate each other.
To write a story about the Serpent and the Sword falling in love is to write a story about transgression.
Not just in the sense that they are a demon and an angel, and it's ~forbidden. That's part of it, yeah, but the greater part of it is that they are THIS demon and angel, in particular. From The Real Bible's Book of Genesis, in the chapter where man falls.
It's the sort of thing you write and laugh. And then you look at it. And you think. And then you frown, and you sit up a little straighter. And you think.
And then you keep writing.
And what emerges hits you like a goddamn truck.
(...A lot of Pratchett reads that way. I believe Gaiman when he says Pratchett would have been happy with the romance, by the way. I really really do).
It's a story about transgression, about love as transgression. They break the rules by loving each other, by loving creation, and by rejecting the hatred and hypocrisy that would have triangulated them as a unified blow against humanity, before humanity had even really got started. And yeah, hell, it's a queer romance too, just to really drive the point home (oh, that!!! THAT!!!)
...I could spend a long time wildly gesturing at this and never be satisfied. Instead of watching me do that (I'll spare you), please look at this gif:
I love this shot so much.
Look at Eve and Crowley moving, at the same time in the same direction, towards their respective wielders of the flaming sword. Adam reaches out and takes her hand; Aziraphale reaches out and covers him with a wing.
You know what a shot like that establishes? Likeness. Commonality. Kinship.
"Our side" was never just Crowley and Aziraphale. Crowley says as much at the end of season 1 ("--all of us against all of them."). From the beginning, "our side" was Crowley, Aziraphale, and every single human being. Lately that's around 8 billion, but once upon a time it was just two other people. Another couple. The primeval mother and father.
But Adam and Eve die, eventually. Humanity grows without them. It's Crowley and Aziraphale who remain, and who protect it. Who...oversee it's upbringing.
I was thinking about the fact that we saw the āGood Omensā book in Aziraphaleās bookshop when Jim was sorting books
so my new headcanon is that in every Good Omens universe every other version of Good Omens exists as a medium. like, in the Book Omens universe the radio drama and the series are a thing; in Radio Omens there are the series and the book. and the musical, of course, thereās always that
Iām absolutely sure itās always Crowley whoās behind this. he does that just for a laugh. and then he comes to Aziraphale, shows what heās created to him and goes, āGUESSSSS WHATā
and every time the funniest thing Crowley comes up with is the movie script. Aziraphale is so pissed in every universe. it never fails to make Crowley laugh
My family has started calling my cat "the beast" which is very funny considering she's a 19yo arthritic old lady who needs help up and down the stairs. Not to mention she doesn't really meow any more, just sits and stares at you, and im the only one who can reliably guess what she wants, so my parents are constantly messaging me "The beast awakens... I know not what she desires š„š„" i feel like the chosen prophet of an eldritch god
This sounds fake but the logic behind it is actually really interesting? She said obsession with a new fandom triggers quick dopamine release when we consume all this related content--it's easy and addictive.
What we're NOT getting is that 'slow dopamine' that's more sustainable and engaging. That's the kind we get from DOING things that take effort but are ultimately rewarding.
So like, she suggested that writing fic and making fanart are ways to balance the quick dopamine of watching a show/reading fic with the slow dopamine of working at something that takes effort.
Moral of the story is you should engage in the process of creation around your favorite things. You'll feel better for it.
dailybridgerton
blakekathryn
germansingergirl
tangentwithtanner
gummygunk
origamiaround
