snowman

all at once and nothing at all.

[fairytaleprincessart]

[daisydreamer]

☕️

[xanaxfarts]

A solar halo is a ring of light that appears around the sun. It's caused by sunlight refracting through ice crystals in high, thin cirrus clouds.

[mothercain]

Hello very much :)

I thought about making a video on this topic but I decided to just write it out in a post instead. Either way, I'd like to speak a bit more specifically about a drunk rant I made on a separate account the other day that was not as well put together as I'd like to stand as my viewpoints on the subject.

tl:dr, I just feel as though there's a lack of sincerity in the world these days. I speak from personal experience as an artist putting things out into the world, yes, but also as a human being interacting with other human beings on the regular, and I have had my sentiments echoed by many other friends of mine over the past year or so, both artists and non-artists alike. Most of this will be framed through the consumption of art, because that's my own personal passion in this life of mine, but also the way we interface with each other and process the world around us. Now, don't get me wrong, I love to laugh. I love a good joke, and I love lightheartedness as much as the next person. But I saw someone this morning put it very succinctly in response to my rant, something along the lines of "don't let the joke about it overtake the source material." It feels as though it's a common occurrence these days to take a pinch of something with a lot more weight to it, often a humorous bit, and then run with it. Everyone then gathers around the pinch to ooh and ahh and consume it as a whole. Context is immediately lost, the legacy of that body of work becomes its own caricature, and anyone discovering that body of work via said caricature may forgo a piece of art they would otherwise love because "there's nothing there". And don't think this is me griping at those making jokes at the expense of my art. I make jokes about my own art. But when the joke dies, yet continues to grow, and spread, and finds its way back to me both on the internet and off for months (or, God forbid, years) to come, I can't help but say to myself; what the fuck is happening. Artists have fled the public and all their outlets for personality and expression outside the medium because they feel ridiculed. It's not even just their art. Katya comes to mind, speaking on how she went on youtube live a few years back in literal tears talking about police brutality and the injustices marginalized communities were facing at the hands of the government. Meanwhile, the entire comment section "yass" and "mother"ed her in barrages, not paying attention to anything she had to say. I get asked about when I'm dropping Preacher's Daughter vinyl en masse in response to my Palestine fundraiser links. It's everywhere and it's inescapable. No one can be serious for even two seconds.

This may all sound obnoxious; so be it. I tie strings from this central problem to many other complaints I have heard repeated ad nauseam the past few years. For example; the death of subculture. Goth, punk, whatever, you name it. People who built an underground counterculture movement with a rich history based on a love of art, community, and otherwise misunderstood worldviews and experiences deemed foul or inappropriate. Now we see bits taken from it, the terms and the looks, without any of the meat, spread thin across society as a whole. Words mean nothing anymore. One can rest on history and say they were a part of it when in fact, they did nothing. No appreciation or understanding to be had for the love and passion that built it. No serious interaction with the culture's very real confines and boundaries, just mindless co-opting. This has just as much to do with late stage capitalism as it does with excessive humor in lieu of sincerity, but it's certainly both. Again, this may sound like a silly complaint, but I don't care. The collective ennui we're all experiencing has a very real reason, whether we're ready to acknowledge or not.

In a twisted thread, it's even tied to our lack of care to change the world around us. People cheer on the idea of communism, but who among us is ready to give up the convenience of society as it stands? Amazon prime, doordash, fresh fruit out of season as I saw someone mention in a similar post last week; the marvels of modern technology. Do we really think these things can last in a society that isn't actively destroying the planet? We talk about the idea of something all day long but have very little to do with the actuality of what we're talking about. And don't think I consider myself exempt from this problem. I couldn't even try to claim to be. It seems nearly silly to be complaining, then, about the way people consume the art around them these days as we creep towards what feels like the end of days. But as long as I still draw breath, I must complain.

I miss genuine passion. As an autistic individual, when I'm alone, sometimes I cannot contain myself with how things make me feel. The music I listen to, the video games I play, the books I read. I almost feel the need to run through the house and scream in everyone's face how I'm feeling. It feels good to love intensely. Now, I won't pretend like autistic people haven't been bullied for this since the dawn of time, but there is surely a noticeable lack of passion in everything these days. Everyone can feel it, everyone is talking about it. Everything now is "cringe", or "doing too much", or "not that serious". Actually, it is that serious. Insecurity in one's own deeper feelings may not be a new thing, but a culture that seems to promote this eschewing of them does seem to be a new evil. The tone of the internet has completely shifted. I spent most of my time here when I first discovered it a little over a decade ago on Zelda forums and other chat-based websites, talking about how much I loved whatever fandom I was in at the time and having genuine and memorable interactions with like-minded individuals who felt the same way I do. Now, you have two options; if you hate media, you rip it to shreds, and if you love it, you word-salad it to death and parrot a joke about it that someone else said. I'm not saying people don't still talk seriously in a heartfelt way about the things they love, but it does not seem to be the initial reaction anymore. Do I have a solution to this problem? Of course not. I'm a 26 year old girl posting on a tumblr blog. If I had a solution, this is not where I would be dropping it. But conversation is God to man, and I believe in the ability to change things from the inside out. We make the rules, and we can change them.

Before I go, I'd like to just clarify that I am very grateful for my career, grateful to anyone who has ever given me and my art the time of day, grateful to anyone who has ever come up to me and connected with me over my work, and grateful for a life where someone making too many jokes is the worst part of my day. I do not think I am better nor smarter than anyone on or off the internet. I am simply a girl with big feelings and I enjoy talking about them with other people with big feelings, and it makes me sad when something avoidable or unnecessary gets in the way of that.

All in all, I love to love, and I love all of you, I love my life, I love this record, and mi amore vo- i mean.... oh, whatever.

(Feel free to sound off in the comments and please be nice to each other)

[shadowseductress]

To all my desi girlies:

the urge to put gajra in her hairs and kiss her neck endlessly.

[alizehkikahaani]

ek payal taufe me dene wala toh main bhi deserve karti hoon!✨

[blabbershere]

[thecrazyinktrovert]

Arijit really does it all, huh

Want a song where you're pouring your heart out to your beloved and apologising? There's Jaan Nisaar

Want a song where you're saying f you to your ex after realising you deserve better? There's Breakup Song.

Want a song where you're contrasting yourself with your beloved and giving your all to them? There's Kalank title track.

Want a song about promising each other to stay together forever? There's Janam Janam

Want a song where you're ready to wait for ages just for their forgiveness? There's Samjhawan

Want a love song + party song where you're ready to be your true self with your loved one? There's Raat Bhar.

Want a song where you've seen the highs and the lows TOGETHER? There's Rasiya reprise

Want a song about unrequited love where you love them even though they don't love you back? There's Channa mereya

Want a song about the angst of separation and longing stares? There's Khairiyat.

Want a song about friendship with the person you grew up with and would give your life for? There's Tera Yaar Hoon Main

Want a song about unrequited love where it's all about situationships with that person? There's Shayad

Want a song about accepting them no matter their response? There's Main Phir Bhi Tumko Chaahunga

He can sing any genre, any type of song, but he'll make sure you'll get all the feels!! Arijit really is superior>>>>>>

[halfdeadwaffles]

(The secret history spoiler warning)

unironically the thing I love most about the secret history is that it’s messed up by all means. Each character from the Greek class is messed up one way or another, and their faults, their fatal flaws—they’re not just any flaws no, they’re flaws that make these characters horrid. Yes they had cute interactions, yes I always think about their time in the countryhouse, when they were by the lake and Camilla injured her foot, Francis in his robe and Henry in his suit with the trousers rolled up to the knees, looking like a banker in an old impressionist painting, as he wades into the water, Charles saving Richard a sandwich and almost getting in trouble for it, bunny being kind to Richard at the start of the book and trusting him to the very end, the way bunny and Marion were so old married couple coded, Judy Poovey talking Richard’s ears off and being a girl 🎀, Henry beating up that jock for Camilla

Despite all this, Charles remains an incestuous drunkard and an abuser, Francis remains a melodramatic man who’d ask just about anyone he thinks attractive to bed on the first meeting, he’s also an anxious mess and refuses to believe there are consequences to his chain smoking, Camilla is manipulative and we know little of her bc of Richard’s idolisation, Richard morbidly longing for the picturesque at the expense of others’ lives and viewing the Greek class through rose tinted glasses, bunny was a homophobe and racist and leeched off everyone’s money—he literally put Richard on the spot during one of their first interactions in the book when he took him to the Brasserie and had Henry pay for everything—and looking through his sick friend’s diary and he was so darn annoying I couldn’t stand him at all in the first read, and even that might as well be exaggerated because it’s only Richard’s perspective on him, and bunny seemed to be well liked in the university by those outside the Greek class. I don’t even know where to start with Henry, I’m gonna have to make a separate post for him alone at this point. And even Judy, remember when Richard met her in the bathroom and she was talking about her slamming into Camilla when Camilla JUST entered the place, and when Camilla called her out Judy just dunked her beer on her because being drunk is a perfect excuse to see that as the right thing to do? And then when Henry and Charles went up to defend Camilla Judy called them abusers for defending her? 😭 though Henry breaking Spike’s bones is another thing to be honest. and don’t get me started on the bacchanal—the four of them killing an innocent man in their frenzy and getting away with it and brushing it under the rug later on. They’re literal murderers, and that’s before the plan of murdering Bunny was introduced

and ALL of them are chainsmokers and alcoholics to a dangerous point, can you even imagine the smell?????

anyhow, the main point of this ramble, is that to get a good sense of what this book is really about, I’d suggest rereading it at least once. Donna is a master of her craft, and this work of hers is anything but shallow, even the flaws are so perfectly placed and shadowed by our unreliable narrator to the point where there’s a big bunch of readers who completely ignore them (think of how there’s critics and readers who assume that Lolita is a romance novel) , but if you look from a more rational angle you’ll understand what Donna was trying to communicate

and I love love love how she did all of this

[smeagol-on-my-deagol]

PART 3

reading 'the secret history' by donna tartt for the first time, here are my thoughts after reading through chapter 3:

[CONTAINS SPOILERS] obviously

— jesus fucking christ richard

— i hate that this chapter not only makes me feel bad for richard, but also makes me actively like henry (which like yikes, my richard-ification era)

— i feel like richard gets roped into the murder plot when he realizes that it'll create an "opening" in the group for him

— cause he still feels like an outsider to me despite spending time mostly with the greek class, but also that could be on purpose to try to separate himself from the fact that he helped/participated in murdering a dude

— the scenes with him looking over the river like "man it would be horrible to fall, to die that way" like ugh

— FUCK bunny corcoran

— trying to avoid being lured into the trap of feeling like they were slightly justified in killing their friend because as much as bunny sucks, i do realize he did not deserve to be murdered

— henry winter, standing in the unheated purple warehouse with a giant hole in the ceiling that richard spent nearly an entire vermont winter in: damn bitch you live like this??

— henry's middle name is MARCHBANKS ????

— also he has a photo of julian on his closet door?? yikes man

— henry not knowing about the moon landing, then hardly knowing about marilyn monroe

— i am shocked at how shocked the twins were last chapter that richard picked up on henry being irritated with bunny like what

— i wonder what francis and henry were plotting at the end,,, second thoughts on murder perhaps??

— does richard know anything about camilla's personality as a separate entity from the group or as more than just a girl he spends time around??

— richard papen they could never make me like you

— no but seriously, i am both charmed by all of the characters and horrifyingly put off by them

[edit to add one more thing]

— why does everyone want richard soooo bad??

[htatm-deactivated20240625]

I always think its interesting when people defend Donna Tartt writing Camilla one-dimensionally because "the narration is through Richards eyes", which is honestly a stance i used to have before reading Emma Clines introduction to The Virgin Suicides (which you can find in the 25th anniversary edition) where she describes how the Lisbon sisters are described voyeuristically by a group of boys but still each harbor a unique identity

It's easy to get lazy writing the Manic Pixie Dream Girl fantasy but even Summer Finn had her flaws and her own opinions and so did Ramona Flowers

Why take that agency away from Camilla Macauley?

You can also argue that taking her agency away intrinsically echoes greek tragedy, where the woman gets conquered by the hero (similar to how Henry is the one who ends up with Camilla before he heroically sacrifices himself to protect the group (you can argue about how heroic or protective what he did really was))

I just think that it is possible to give her the tragic fate and sprinkle in some identity

if Richard can do cocaine in a burger king parking lot and Henry can have a passion for gardening and strong opinions on gucci then surely Camilla can be things aside from "the only female in what was basically a boys club"

[rockrosethistle]

TSH hot takes 🔥

-Julian was actually a dick. He isolated and groomed vulnerable students (do you think it's a coincidence that every single member of the greek class had a difficult home life?) into thinking that these very outdated concepts of love and power were good for them. He compared their dangerous behaviour to that of ancient gods. Then, rather than face the consequence of his actions and take accountability, he left when it mattered.

-Charles was an asshole, but he's not a scapegoat. You cannot blame all the problems on Charles, he was an addict as a result of his trauma. He needed help. This doesn't excuse him from his actions, but it explains them. At the beginning of the book he physically could not bring himself to hurt Camilla. He's not a "bad" person. He's a sick person.

-Bunny didn't deserve to die, but he was also probably going to condemn the group at some point. He didn't just die for no reason. (Believing that Bunny's death was truly pointless also means believing that Henry was an actual psychopath who killed his friend for shits and giggles.)

-Judy, Cloke and Sophie ended up the happiest. That is literally the moral of the book. Judy wasn't all tortured when Richard didn't want to hang out with her, she shook it off and kept living her life. That's literally the point.

-Richard was never in love with Camilla. He loved the idea of her, but didn't see her as a person. Because of this specific dynamic and the fact the Richard is narrating, we know nothing about her actual personality. Anything he says can be disputed, and a lot of it contradicts itself.

-Francis is not blameless or unproblematic, but of the group he probably had the best intentions. Most of his behaviour that can be interpreted as creepy can be chalked up to Richard's internalized homophobia (remember, everything is told from his point of view, and Francis was a gay man in the 80's) When you look objectively at what Francis did, you see that he made a pass, got rejected, then dropped it and moved on. There is (i think) one more attempt made later on in the book, and that is furthered by Richard and only interrupted when Charles shows up.

-Henry may be the metaphorical representative of death when talking about the book, but in the narrative it's important to remember he's also just a person. Otherwise everything he does seems beyond question, and he's assigned this label as just "evil." He was 21!! Literally still a kid

-There were not good or bad characters. The reason they hit so hard is because each of them are so layered. They all have good traits and bad traits, but calling one "evil" takes away their humanity and dismisses their complexity that makes them so great.

[mercutio-of-escalus]

reading books like the secret history is always such a wild ride, because i'm fully aware that it's a criticism of aesthetic hedonism and the elitism of academia, and then i'll read a line like " if we are strong enough in our souls we can rip away the veil and look at that naked, terrible beauty right in the face; let God consume us, devour us, unstring our bones. then spit us out reborn" and i go absolutely fucking feral.

[henrywinterswife]

practically every character in The Secret History played a role of someone that they were not.

richard and bunny played themselves as rich, when in fact they were poor.

charles and camilla played themselves as pure, when in fact they were weaved with immorality.

francis played himself as cool, when in fact he was an anxious mess.

henry played himself as intellectual, when in fact he was blinded by his own stupidity, wealth, and ego.

julian played himself as a father figure, aiding to the care and minds of the Greek students, when in fact he was conniving and egocentric, swept away by his own gain, unlike a true father.

mrs corcoran played herself as a victim and sorrowful mother of a lost child, when in fact she only cared about her own appearance in front of the camera.

hell, even dr roland played himself as a psychologically-forward man, deep in intellect, when in fact he was nearing dementia and a complete gobble of a man.

i mean, gosh, this theme plays out so grandly. putting up a front and hiding your real self. whether for gain or by self consciousness.

[bazberkker]

Little things in TSH that I had missed or forgotten the first time I read it:

It took Richard a whole year of pestering the college to let him in. It really proves how obsessive he is

Richard bumping into Francis in the hall before he joins the study group and being like: “Wowee I can’t believe that guy touched me. That was so cool; he was SO cool :D”

Francis talking to a cat he found on campus 🥹

CHARLES AND CAMILLA HAVE SLIGHT SOUTHERN ACCENTS

Julian loves flowers and keeps a bunch in his classroom

Richard’s Totally Real Car, Christine

Judy costuming, in her own words, “fucking As You Like It” implying that she also has to study obnoxious literature for her classes

Bunny genuinely believing Francis is as smart as Henry

Bunny is the only person who can make Henry laugh 🥺

Francis had a relative who died on the Titanic

Bunny would hide out at Richard’s whenever he pissed Marion off

Francis used to read Richard’s French homework out loud for him

Bunny’s hero is Caesar

Henry’s middle name is Marchbanks

Francis is a fan of the Boston Red Sox

The twins shrug with one shoulder

Henry finds Gucci “rather grand”

Charles’ wild cat that he forces Francis and Richard to bring to the farmhouse

Richard reads Proust *cough, cough, kinda gay, cough, cough*

When Francis is in the hospital in the epilogue, Richard reads “Our Mutual Friend” to him which, according to Goodreads, is about “the unfailing power of wealth to corrupt all who crave it.”

[tendergraphite]

The Secret History: A Theories Guide

Richard Papen: The Master of Illusion

Julian Morrow: ''Honesty Is A Dangerous Virtue''

Henry Winter Wasn't In A Car Accident.

What Led To Henry Winters Death

Bunny Corcoran: Neglect In Plain Sight

When the Hare knows the Devil is out Hunting. [Bunny Analysis]

Francis Is The Worst Character (And Why You Should Think So Too)

Camilla & Henry: A Relationship Analysis

^Character Analysis^

The Mountain Lion: It Isn't A Theory

The Secret History's Dream Sequences.

The Secret History Isn't purposely Queer. (Richard Is Still Gay though, Here's Why!)

^Extras^

If you have a theory or take or whatever the fuck—comment down bellow! If it's intriguing enough I will see if I can either 1) Disprove it or 2) Prove your theory without a shadow of a doubt

(Obviously the commenter will be credited!)

[ Links will be added as I post ]

[bazberkker]

TSH spoilers:

I feel like we as a fandom do not talk about Henry’s symbolism in TSH enough. Like, that dude is the literal embodiment of death, and I just think it’s so damn cool. I mean, his whole obsession with language and literature stemmed from the fact that he almost died in a car accident. And then every death we see in the book (the farmer’s, Bunny’s, and his very own) is directly at his hands. The others were accomplices, sure, but Henry’s the one who takes action every time. And in Francis’s failed suicide and Richard’s near death in the epilogue, they both see Henry, not Bunny or Charles or what have you.

Henry is not only obsessed with death, he IS death. He’s the reaper who’s friends toy with their mortality all the time through drugs and booze. The reason they all admire him is not only because of his size and stature and brilliance; it’s because he’s dangerous. If beauty is indeed terror, than he’s the most beautiful of them all. They all have the life preservation skills of a fly, so of course they love Henry. And of course his actions constantly bring them closer to danger and death.

[thebeesareback]

I just finished the audio book for Donna Tartt's novel The Secret History, so naturally I had to have a lil scroll to see what everyone thought on Tumblr. To add to the discourse: (spoilers, obviously)

Also trigger warning: incest, abuse, murder, alcoholism

Why is Tumblr so in love with Henry Winter?! He murders the farmer, Bunny, and possibly tries to kill Charles. He's manipulative and may well try to make Richard take the fall (har har) for Bunny's death. In the garden scene, he admits to being a psychopath/sociopath. Oh, and he's unbelievably pretentious

Also, why are there so many cute pictures of the twins hanging out? Their relationship was strained, incestuous, co-dependent, abusive. The whole uwu thing baffles me

Richard has a very obvious foot fetish and nobody is talking about it

The novel is quite funny, and I wish more people picked up on that. Most of the humour comes from Francis - the pinz nez stays ON during sex; no, Bunny's parents weren't very upset when one of their grandchildren ruined Francis' scarf, they were preoccupied by their missing son; and there's a throwaway line where the art students eat sushi with paintbrushes instead of chopsticks. I also liked when the twins panicked after Bunny's murder and decided to start repotting tulips

The farmer is referred to by name twice. Once in a newspaper, once by Bunny. Strange to think that he's the person in the squad who might actually have a conscience. Incidentally, Milo, the golden retriever who finds Bunny's body, has his name mentioned more frequently.

Richard is a smelly, badly dressed misanthrope. As is Henry, and Charles towards the end. Francis, Camilla and Hampden itself provide the (admittedly gorgeous) dark academia aesthetic, but if you want to end that dream, remember how terrible everything would have smelled. I guess the difference between appearance and reality is a pretty big theme

Julian is very creepy, obviously, but I was surprised that he wasn't more involved in the plot. He seems like exactly the sort of person to start a cult. I'd also like to know if he and Henry were in a sexual relationship, because we see them kiss once and then it's never mentioned again

Foreshadowing is done EXCELLENTLY through the book. There were a few characters who were described as ghostly at the start, and I THINK they're the ones who survive. Also, Tartt loves her pathetic fallacy (not phallusy).

Time is very strange. If you bothered to plot out all of the events, I don't think it quite makes sense. Term starts in September, say Richard joins Julian's classes in early October? That means all the picnics, the Sunday walks with Bunny, the trips to Francis' house, all happen over about five weeks, leading to the 12th November when Charles, Henry and Francis kill the farmer. Unreliable narrator, I guess

A lot of things about Richard's character make more sense when you realise the abuse he grew up experiencing and witnessing. Poor Ms Papen. Odd that Richard's parents don't visit him when he's in hospital

Funny that everyone is surprised when the twins' incest comes out. Like, they had an orgy at the start of the baccanal. Call me a prude, but I wouldn't attend an orgy with a family member

I would go for girls' night with Judy Poovey

Also, the book was published in 1992. Does anyone know when Prince Charles and Camila Parker Bowles went public with their relationship? Seems like an unbelievable coincidence otherwise

If anyone has an actual criteria for identifying alcohol abuse/alcoholism, please lmk if any of the main six characters AREN'T alcoholics. I'm pretty sure I got liver cirrhosis and lung cancer just from reading this book