(source) its so funny how actual Greek and Homeric scholars are talking about this movie vs the fact that people on tumblr are acting like Nolan personally dug up Homer's actual bones and pissed on them
Fai_Ryy

Discoholic đȘ©
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

#extradirty
Show & Tell

tannertan36

â

izzy's playlists!
One Nice Bug Per Day

Andulka

ellievsbear
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
Cosmic Funnies
Mike Driver
RMH
tumblr dot com
almost home
$LAYYYTER
will byers stan first human second

seen from TĂŒrkiye
seen from United States
seen from Peru
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Armenia

seen from T1
seen from Poland
seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from TĂŒrkiye
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Nigeria
seen from United States
@citylightscomebackinjune
(source) its so funny how actual Greek and Homeric scholars are talking about this movie vs the fact that people on tumblr are acting like Nolan personally dug up Homer's actual bones and pissed on them
Also loved that it actually is Woke Odyssey. Not in a "we cast black and trans actors" way but in a "this is a movie about man's hubris, the disregard for and destruction of social contracts, the disdain with which we treat the living and the dead, the violence we wage against each other, the way we become enraptured with 'great' instead of 'right,' and the way all of that degrades the soul of man" way
Mitch McConnell's pr team right now:
Meanwhile, the people of KentuckyâŠ
do you ever find something that is so funny and you want to share it with everyone but it also requires 18 layers of context spanning things like. 90s anime. aviation history. europop. canada. in order to even remotely understand why it is so funny
in the late 90s there was an anime called initial d which was all about street racing and drifting. naturally every single drift was played for great drama and excitement.
in 1999, an italian named giancarlo pasquini released a europop song under the alias dave rogers called Deja Vu. this song was picked up as the theme song for the above anime. it in turn became a meme, a shorthand for drifting and Cool Moves as a concept.
in 1983, air canada flight 143, a full sized 767, ran out of fuel halfway to edmonton, alberta. this is not something you want to have happen to a huge airplane. the flight chose to try and make an emergency landing at a nearby decomissioned airforce base (as they were falling fast and could not make it to a proper airport), where they ran into a second problem: they were falling out of the sky at 500 feet per mile, but reached gimli (the base in question) while still too high to safely land. normally a plane would just do a big loop-de-loop to lose altitude, but they had maybe three minutes of airtime left before they hit the ground: not enough time to make any kind of circle. the pilot, therefore, decided to execute a side slip to lose speed and altitude. this is Not a move you want to do with a massive 767, because airplanes are not built for that and if you screw it up that plane is hitting the ground at a high speed at a weird angle and breaking into a million pieces. nevertheless, the captain tried it... and succeeded. the plane landed perfectly, and there were no major injuries! (a couple of people did get minor injuries when evacuating the plane after.) he did it so well, in fact, that the plane was refueled, flown out of gimli a couple days later, and continued to fly for another 20 years with the nickname "Gimli Glider."
what is a side-slip, you ask?
it's drifting.
the guy goddamn drifted his 767.
in 2008, the tv show Mayday: Air Disaster featured the gimli glider with full reenactments as an episode on season five of their show.
and so, in conclusion, the thing i have been giggling to myself about all weekend:
this is somehow starting to make the rounds so because i am a pedant i am going to take this time to talk a little more in depth about air canada 143, the GIMLI GLIDER
so you may be wondering: how the hell does a 737 (capacity of roughly 100-120 people) run out of fuel midair? the METRIC SYSTEM, that's how!
up until the early eighties, airplanes would have three people in the cockpit: the pilot, first officer, and flight engineer. generally speaking, the pilot's job is to fly the airplane; the first officer's job is to provide support, monitor instruments, and assist (the pilot and FO will swap roles periodically), and the flight engineer's job was to watch over all the fuel gauges, electrical systems, hydraulics, etc., to make sure they were all working properly, as well as taking charge of things like "setting engine power."
however, in the early 1980s -- when this story takes place -- the flight engineer role began to be made obsolete as computers and more advanced systems became capable of doing most of that work. the boeing 737 of this story was one such plane: actually, air canada 143 was quite a new airplane at the time of the accident, and had no flight engineer.
also in the early 1980s? canada was making the switch from the imperial system to metric.
neither of these things is bad in and of themselves. but put together? one of the flight engineer's jobs was to monitor fuel; it hadn't yet been made clear whose job it was now. canada, at the time, was doing refuelling in a convoluted "the fuel is weighed in pounds but put into the plane as liters" system that required Math and Conversion.
let's talk about AIRPLANE FUEL. unlike a car, you don't take your airplane to the station and fill 'er up: fuel has weight, and airplanes care a LOT about weight. way more than you'd imagine. it's the pilot's job to therefore calculate a) how much fuel they need to get from A to B b) how much extra/emergency fuel they need for safety and c) if and when they need to refuel and by how much. is there bad weather in the area? where's the nearest backup airport? if i need Ten Fuels to get to alberta and there's storms in alberta, i need another Two Fuels to circle around and kill time before landing safely, plus another Five Fuels to get to calgary in case alberta is impossible. my airplane is fully loaded, which means it's heavier than usual, so needs another One Fuel for takeoff power. so altogether i need Eighteen Fuels. except i'm in canada in the 1980s so now i need to figure out what that is in liters, and this used to be the flight engineer's job, and idk man. maybe it's 5 liters? that sounds right?
...you see the issue. it isn't that anyone was slacking off, but no one was quite sure what the conversion was, and so instead of giving the soon-to-be Gimli Glider 18 Fuels, they took off in that fucker with nowhere near enough fuel. to make things worse, the plane had a broken fuel gauge, which was a whole other thing and series of comical misunderstandings, but basically it meant that not only was there No Fuel, but the fuel gauges looked something like this:
the very-soon-to-be crashed airplane's day started off normally. they did a little hour long flight from one city to another with no issues. because they knew the fuel gauges were being silly, while on the ground they did a "stick test", which i'm imagining involved a tree branch, basically checking that yep, there was fuel in the tanks, we're good! (in actuality, what it was doing was measuring the weight of the fuel. except, again, they had their maths all backwards, so due to this convoluted conversion process they went "our fuel weighs 5 kilograms, which equals 20 pounds, which equals 18 fuels, which equals 900 liters." just. silly math. i don't want to make these guys out to be idiots: they would obviously have never flown the plane if they had realized their mistake. but the other problem was of course that the process was already convoluted and required multiple conversions; imagine how much worse it would be if, like these pilots, it was a new system you weren't used to!)
so they boarded their passengers and set off from montreal with the intention of flying to edmonton. and that's when things all went terribly wrong.
pictured: the intended and my interpretation of the actual flight.
all this set up leads to the actual flight, which is almost boring in summary: while high up in the sky, the plane suddenly ran out of fuel. this is bad. we do not want this to happen. the pilots had no idea what was happening at first, but i mean: it was pretty obvious. there's no fuel. no engines. no power. you're 30,000 feet in the air in a 64 ton machine and gravity is going hey girllll heyyyy.
but the thing is, airplanes are really cool. like, this is what got me so interested in these plane crashes and accidents: airplanes are awesome. because first of all: just because you weigh as much as a building and are thousands and thousands of meters in the air? doesn't mean the airplane just falls. hell no! without power, an airplane will still stay in the air, losing altitude, sure, but gliding fairly safely and manageably. this doesn't mean you're safe, but: when air canada 143 lost all power, it still had time and options. it also had... the RAT.
the Ram Air Turbine, or the RAT, is an amazing fucking guy. if an airplane loses power? a hatch pops open, and a little propeller drops down automatically. he's wind powered, and he will provide just enough backup power to keep the most critical systems online, even without fuel or engines or god. we LOVE the rat. and the rat leapt into action here, providing the pilots with enough basic systems to keep going.
this doesn't mean that air canada is out of the woods. landing without power is not easy! the trick to landing an airplane is doing it at a nice shallow angle and low speed, which involves things like "doing nice steady turns to line up with a runway" (no time, we're falling steadily), "using engines to get our speed right" (what engines), "getting to the correct altitude and speed to touch down gently" (we have NO POWER we can't go "oopsie too low" and pull up and adjust). if a plane loses too much speed, it WILL fall out of the sky (a stall) because the aerodynamics stop working. if it's going too fast, you're not landing, you're diving cockpit first into the ground. without power, you can turn, but turns will reduce speed. you can't level off or go back up. you are Going In A Downward Direction. the trick is figuring out how fast and how far and aiming at a runway.
this is also where ATC comes in! we love air traffic controllers!! air canada called a mayday, and ATC leapt into action. their job becomes to Get Them What They Need. air canada wants to go anywhere in canada? atc will move everyone out of the way and get them any runway in the northern hemisphere. when this happened, air canada 143 was near winnipeg, which was their initial goal: this IS going to be a crash landing, and the nearer they can be to emergency services, the better. however, the first officer was doing Good Math, calculating their rate of decent vs distance flown, and soon realized that even though they could literally see winnipeg from the windows, they just weren't going to make it. they were falling too fast.
enter: GIMLI. the first officer had actually trained there during his air force days; it's a former base with two runways. it wasn't ideal, because ATC had no information on it and it lacked instruments and equipment (normally, for example, airports will have locator beams and so on to help an aircraft lock on to the runway at the Correct Safe Angle), but... better than a field or lake. one of the dangers of this type of no engine landing is actually being non-committal: waiting too long to make a decision, trying to maximize time in the air rather than land. this makes sense! it's probably pretty human instinct! prolong that crash as long as possible! but it's much, much better to simply Commit and Prepare and Go For It. and that's exactly what air canada now did.
they told ATC they're going to gimli and made the turn. the cabin crew was meanwhile preparing the passengers for a crash landing.
the crazy thing about plane crashes is, actually, that they are very survivable. don't get me wrong: they're bad. people die. but the number of worst case scenarios where dozens of people still, somehow, survive? shockingly high. of course, you don't want ANYONE to die. i would be terrified if it was me. but cabin crew had to know it would probably be... well, not okay. but that if they got everyone prepared and braced, people were going to make it out. people were going to survive this. possibly most of them. possibly all of them.
as the plane approached gimli, problem #87 came up: they were still too fucking fast. they're gliding down! they can't stop! normally, a plane would simply slow down with flaps, or maybe do a couple of big circles before reorienting themselves towards the runway to lose some speed and altitude, but they don't have time -- or altitude. and that's where the theme song KICKS IN
here are reasons you DO NOT DRIFT airplanes, by the way. it can fuck up your engines: engines work in part by taking IN air, so flying at a Drifting Angle means that's all wrong. the aerodynamics are wrong. you're losing speed VERY fast. you can get OUT of the drift, but now your engines are fucked. on the other hand, this plane effectively HAS no engines, but... there's a reason people don't drift planes, okay.
another plot twist: gimli air force base was no more. the runways were still there... but it had been turned into a drag strip, ironically enough. and it was family day! picture this. you're a nice canadian racing fan in 1983, at the strip with your family, cooking hotdogs and poutine on a grill. and a fucking 737 APPEARS OUT OF NOWHERE in front of you. because that is exactly what happened. there were KIDS. on BIKES. with a PLANE HEADING RIGHT TOWARDS THEM. in the mayday episode, the kids tried to outrace the plane in a panic: in the pilot's telling, the kids simply froze in fear.
by the time the pilots realized the runway was occupied, it was way too late to turn back. they landed. in a twist of bad luck that turned into good: without power, they had to manually release their landing gear.... and the nose gear didn't lock. this turned out to be a weirdly good thing: without nose gear, the plane's nose hit the runway and acted as one hell of a brake in ITSELF, grinding on the asphalt as the plane barreled down at high speed. the pilot also intentionally steered the plane into the rail in the middle of the runway, trying to slow the plane even more. and... it worked! the plane came to a stop. everyone was fine. even the kids on bikes.
all this friction caused a small fire in the nose, and so the pilots called for an immediate evacuation to be safe. this caused a bit of an issue: because the nose was on the ground, the butt of the plane was higher than usual, and the back slides were basically just vertical drops. a couple people got mildly hurt using them, as you'd expect.
meanwhile, the drag strip folks were rushing over with fire extinguishers and the like, and the small fire was easily contained (note: do not fuck with burning airplanes. this one had no fuel so COULD be contained). by the time ATC got emergency services to gimli, everyone was safe, ankles were being iced, and presumably everyone was eating hot dogs.
the airplane itself had some minor damage (from when the nose acted as a brake), but was largely intact: it was patched up, refuelled, and took off from gimli a while later, where it flew for another 20 years before retiring of old age.
and that is the story of the Gimli Glider: that time a pilot drifted his plane so hard that he saved the lives of everyone on his plane.
all 69 of them đ
I had read the story of the Gimli Glider before, and I had seen the video with "Deja Vu" playing, but I never understood where the song came from or why it was supposed to be funny before.
This is "The Most Tumblr Punchline" in action, only I didn't realize there was something to look up.
Now that I do?
Okay, that's funny.
Young Woman Reading (Girl Reciting the Quran)
Osman Hamdi Bey
oil on canvas, 1880
Mount Rainier National Park by Travis
pick up that non-fiction book
not all of us can live in fantasy 100% the time like i see some people on here do and it's refreshing to learn something new. its been philosophy, essays, and history for me and i feel much more at home on planet Earth for it knowing that people have been struggling and wishing similarly for millenia.
its not that fiction doesnt have its place, its important and healthy to exercise the imagination, but non-fiction can do so much to boost and supplement that. if not for yourself, for your art or for the people you're around
"representation matters!" but you wont read or engage with non-fiction works about any demographic outside your own
this version of the post doesnt seem to be getting much traction but this is arguably the most important reason why we should be reading nonfiction in addition to fiction
I once argued with my mother, Diana Wynne Jones, about the conclusions to her best books, The Homeward Bounders and Fire and Hemlock, both of which end in a similar way, with the main characters appearing to give up everything, including people they love, in order to anchor or reconstruct the rest of the world. She was adamant that these endings were not simply a relic of self-abnegating moralism from earlier childrenâs fiction, and Iâm sure she was right. She had a deep personal need to position creativity on the far side of despair. But there is often a curiously strong talion effect in fantasy: the act of creating an alternative world seems often to carry as its price and punishment either the loss of the familiar world in which the central characters feel at home, or the loss of love.
--Colin Burrow (as part of a larger discussion of Philip Pullman)
Iâm just going to re-post this picture right hereâŠ
This is it. This is my ur-edition of Howlâs Moving Castle. No cover has ever beaten this one.
Started my annual reread of Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell and was once again struck with the idea that this book isnât about magic but how information is controlled and manipulated amongst the elite while those who wish to use that same information for good are consistently denied. Mr. Norrell holds the greatest library of magic in England and hoards it like a dragon with gold.
It still blows me away of how I see the parallel within modern media and information literacy. When Strange challenges him, he continues to control information for his betterment, creating censorship. One of these days - probably a lot sooner than later - Iâll have to create some post and zine that highlights all the various history within this book I know there is some Wikis out there but something tangible to share would be fun to have.
tl;dr: all "algorithmically" pushed stuff on a newsfeed is mostly ads. nothing that's really surprising form this vulture article, but it is dismal and makes me grateful for one website where you only see things from people you follow WITHOUT horrible short-form video content
What if every viral song, movie, meme, influencer, and celebrity drama in recent memory was the result of a stealth marketing campaign?
https://web.archive.org/web/20260515113210/https://www.vulture.com/article/social-media-feeds-chaotic-good-projects-clipping.html
Have a paywall free link to the source!
"Weâve locked ourselves in the stupidest possible version of Platoâs cave, where what looks like the spontaneous consensus of the hive mind is often just shadows on the wall, put there by marketers, political operatives, foreign-influence campaigns, or anyone else with a few hundred bucks and something to sell."
Daily affirmations:
No one will find the picture in your attic.
It's not your fault the person made of cadavers you sew together and you revived killed your family.
It's perfectly normal to enter your house climbing like a lizard.
The fact that you killed a man doesn't make you guilty, it was just your silly alter ego.
That raven who won't stop saying "nevermore" is an asshole, don't listen to it.
Your fiancé is definitely NOT hiding his mad spouse in his attic.
The big ass dog that killed members of your family isn't real, dw.
You deserve revenge for having been abused as a child, go back to moors and show them!
Go and kidnap that singer!
This isnât a question but for Peteâs sake, Jennifer, now Mac Barnett is dunking on kidlit too?
Itâs justâŠ. so tiring.
I'll preface this by saying that while I've met Mac Barnett, I don't KNOW him, I have no special insight into his thoughts, I like a lot of his books and love a couple of them and don't personally care for others, which is fine. So, you know where I'm coming from, I've got no horse in the race as it were!
In case you missed the scandal du jour, Famous Children's Book Author and National Ambassador for Children's Literature Mac Barnett has a new book out for grownups. It's about, well, children's books. Toward the front of the book, there's a quote which I'll paraphrase: "94.7% of children's books are crud." (It's a riff on a different famous quote by a different author about Science Fiction books, that's not the point, I'm just giving you the background here!)
As you can imagine, a lot of people who have a lot invested in promoting children's books were dismayed by this comment. Which is fair enough, tbh, because yes, out of context â (eta: OR EVEN IN CONTEXT!) â what a monstrous thing to say! Like, talk about privileged, buddy, GET REAL, who are you to "crud" all over your colleagues, and the publishers who publish all those books... including YOUR BOOKS btw?
Tracey Baptiste wrote an excellent response about this and why it matters. Kate Messner wrote another excellent response that I think encapsulates what we, people who love kids books, might do about it. I urge you to read both, they are smarter and more thoughtful than I am!
MEANWHILE, a bit of a dogpile commenced, with people clamoring for him to resign his post as Ambassador, saying his books suck anyway, dragging him through the mud, etc etc. OK. Now you're caught up.
The problem (well not the only problem, but ONE of the problems) here is, the alarming quote has been taken so far out of context that it means the opposite of what I think Mac would say he meant it to mean. (ETA: Not that that makes it a GOOD QUOTE, itâs emphatically a shitty thing to say, just â itâs not the *only part* of the thing he was saying!)
Like, if you were to read the actual book in question as a whole, it's a sort of philosophical defense of Children's Books and why they are important. He explicitly says in that text that it's vital to have all kinds of books, that children need to be able to see themselves in books, that children often like different things than adult gatekeepers like (and vice-versa)... in other words, MUCH of the same stuff that all the people who love and write children's books say all the time.
Additionally, it might or might not be important to note that the book was written and originally published in Italy BEFORE he was the Children's Ambassador, he wasn't writing it from that position. His platform and influence NOW is much bigger than it was a couple of years ago when it was written. (ETA: At this point in time, his position in the world is different, and the effects of his words have bigger ramifications than I think he knew when he wrote them. So this was perhaps âill advisedâ before, but it feels IRRESPONSIBLE now!)
I think he used the word "crud" because it's an objectively fun word and a riff on the original quote, and "94.7%" because it's funnier than 90%. I think he was showing off, because he loves a little rhetorical flourish and didn't ever think it would escape containment and go viral. He wasn't thinking it through. I think he was writing philosophically from an "ivory tower" of sorts, figuring few people aside from Big Fans would ever even read it and it wouldn't have to serve as a Grand Statement. (It's a niche book!)
The thing is, it DID escape containment. Many of the people reacting to that quote aren't up in the tower, they're grappling with reality in the trenches. If the "94.7%" quote is all they hear, OF COURSE it comes off as snobby and elitist and awful. IT IS.
He's a smart guy. He's talented. He clearly thinks a lot and cares a lot about children's books. And A LOT of what he talks about in the book is spot-on. However. Alarming Quotes get a lot more clicks than Nuanced Philosophical Arguments. And with a platform as big as his, they can do a lot of damage.
If you've got this far and are still interested in reading more about it, I'll also point you toward this interview with Mac about the book from PW. And this is a superb review of the book that gets what's right about his arguments, and what's wrong about them: "Mac Barnett is Right. Mac Barnett is also a snob."
Now if you're still fired up about it, I suggest you go back and read Kate's message AGAIN, and use that energy to #BeAnAmbassador yourself.
Apparently a lot of people get dialogue punctuation wrong despite having an otherwise solid grasp of grammar, possibly because theyâre used to writing essays rather than prose. I donât wanna be the asshole who complains about writing errors and then doesnât offer to help, so here are the basics summarized as simply as I could manage on my phone (âdialogue tagâ just refers to phrases like âhe said,â âshe whispered,â âthey askedâ):
âFor most dialogue, use a comma after the sentence and donât capitalize the next word after the quotation mark,â she said.
âBut what if youâre using a question mark rather than a period?â they asked.
âWhen using a dialogue tag, you never capitalize the word after the quotation mark unless itâs a proper noun!â she snapped.
âWhen breaking up a single sentence with a dialogue tag,â she said, âuse commas.â
âThis is a single sentence,â she said. âNow, this is a second stand-alone sentence, so thereâs no comma after âshe said.ââ
âThereâs no dialogue tag after this sentence, so end it with a period rather than a comma.â She frowned, suddenly concerned that the entire post was as unasked for as it was sanctimonious.
And!
âIf youâre breaking dialogue up with an action tagââshe waves her hands back and forthââthe dashes go outside the quotation marks.â
Reblog to save a writerâs life.
Thank you
Oh my god thank you. No wonder grammarly keeps complaining about my punctuation when I boot my writing up into word counter
Happy May the Fourth! I added a second page to this comic from last year!