Taylor Swift stuns for The New York Times "30 Greatest Songwriters"
(April 28, 2026)
my baby is one of the greatest songwriters, I love her so much
cherry valley forever
No title available

tannertan36

Andulka
todays bird

PR's Tumblrdome
noise dept.

No title available

oozey mess
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year

Origami Around

Janaina Medeiros

JBB: An Artblog!
taylor price
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
Game of Thrones Daily

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣

JVL

No title available

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Lithuania

seen from Singapore

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye

seen from Italy
@ghostlymarauder
Taylor Swift stuns for The New York Times "30 Greatest Songwriters"
(April 28, 2026)
my baby is one of the greatest songwriters, I love her so much
Yesterday I finished watching the finale to the last season of The Handmaid's Tale, and ever since I've been trying to convince myself that it was not that bad, mostly because I have been watching the show almost since it first aired and it was a big part of my life and how I view the world. But, truth be told, many things don't sit right with me about the finale.
So, here's me ranting about it.
First and foremost, the fact that the finale and generally the whole season six, wants to pretend this is just June's story. This is June's story, but this is not just June's story.
This is Serena's story, this is Moira's story, this is Janine's story, this is Luke's story, this is Emily's story, this is even Lydia's story. This is the story about people being turned into slaves, into puppets, into ghosts of what they used to be. So, to pretend this was always just June's tale is pretty insulting to all of these characters. Because they didn't get to have proper endings in pro of June's finale.
Which also leaves many questions about so many characters. What happened to Serena? Did she get a passport? What's her destiny going to be? And what about Moira? What will she really do? And how did they get Janine out of Gilead? How did they convince Naomi to give up Charlotte/Angela? What's Janine's life going to look now that she's free? Is she going to fight or is she going to live her life freely?
How did Emily really get out of Gilead? Is she going to go back to her family? And what about Lydia? Why did she stay in Gilead? Is she an asset of Mayday now? Is she going to help the rebellion? And for that matter, what happened to New Bethlehem? The people there, what did they do? Did they get to leave? Are they stuck in Gilead too?
So many fucking questions unanswered because this was "June's story", because this was always June telling us about her life and nothing else. But that's not really the case. At first, of course, this was June telling us her story, but as seasons went by it evolved into a bunch of people telling their story, and I would've liked seeing that.
I really would've liked seeing June interview every single person that was relevant to her story and get their point of view on how things went down during Gilead and before Gilead. I would've liked seeing them take New York and a few other cities, I would've like seeing them get closer to Hannah. I would've liked to see Hannah.
Another question I have is what happened to Rose? Nick's wife, did she get remarried? Did she gave birth? What happened to her after Nick's death? I think she was a relevant enough character for these questions to be answered.
Generally, I think they left so many things out I. pro of telling a mediocre finale for June Osborn. And don't get me wrong, I know the finale is realistic, I know wars are not fought on days and I know happy endings are not plausible in these scenarios but goddammit would it been to hard to just, show Hannah? Don't get her back with June and Luke, that's alright, but tell me she's alive, tell me if she remembers her parents, show me if adapted to Gilead and her makeshift family.
And before you come at me, I know there's supposed to be a new series based on Testaments by Margaret Atwood, but that show is set 15 fucking years after the original ending, so that doesn't really feel satisfying to me.
Anywho, I just hope the show someday get a happier ending because I do believe it is possible to get what we dream for, even when the world is as cruel as The Handmaid's Tale world is. And honestly it would help my mental health if June and especially Luke got to have their daughter back once and for all.
Okay, so I realized that one of the things I like the least about the Stranger Things finale is that it hasn't been long enough for them to be acting so normal. If anything, Mike's the only one who's reasonable enough to still be stuck, but everyone else just... Accepted that everything was over.
The reason this bothers me is because for YEARS they were fighting this evil, for literal YEARS they would think that it was over just for it to be not over. And now you're telling me that didn’t leave any sort of PTSD, that they are not vigilant about the upside down and the abyss and whatnot coming back to hunt them. You're telling me that 18 months later (and even less because Steve, Nancy, Jonathan and Robin have been living their adult life for who knows how long) they just accepted it was truly over and carried on with their lives???
By this I mean it would've been a far better option to have the kids be the adults in the epilogue, meaning a long time has happened and now they're almost one hundred percent sure this all can't come back. That would've been far much better but no, the Duffers had to make another poor decision.
Which talking about poor decision making, what about the 12 kids? Are we forgetting Will barfed a demodog about 18 months later after the first season? Are they going to do the same or nah? Why wouldn't they if they went through the exact same thing as Will? Another thing left unanswered.
Also, why is nobody talking about the fact that in season one, Henry kept Will in the Upside Down but now suddenly he's keeping the kids in the Abyss. And yes, you could argue that maybe it is so nobody can find them (again) but why not do that from the start? I don't know, it just bothers me.
Another thing that bothers me is the demogorgons and demobats and all the other Upside Down/Abyss creatures being M.I.A because what do you MEAN nobody even saw one when in season one you couldn't even get to the Upside Down without facing a demogorgons at least once. Like people point out they aren't in the Abyss, but they're also not in the Upside Down??? Where are they? They left for Christmas vacations early or????
I know I'm late to this whole discussion but it has taken me days to process how shitty this last episode and the entire season in general was. I used to love Stranger Things so deeply and it was an integral part of my life for years because the show used to be so great and for it to have such a poorly written finale makes me incredibly sad.
Anyway, I might keep adding to this at some point because there are SO many nonsensical things in this season and I want to keep yapping my yap about Stranger Things and how bad the Duffers became at writing. So, up until next time.
2026
FUCK HARD
FUCK FAST
FUCK BADLY
NEVER USE GENERATIVE AI
CREATE JOY
MUSIC ALWAYS
PSPSPSPS AT KITTIES ON THE STREET
YUMMY SOUP
go see the doctor about that thing
BE TRANSGENDER
KISS YOUR FRIENDS
EAT CHEESE
NEVER KILL YOURSELF
THRIVE
hard on the never use generative ai
happy birthday everyone
Not what I meant.
happy birthday my beautiful friend Calendar
this deserves to be reposted
i fucking love tumblr on new years i scroll past a glittertext gif wishing me a happy 2002 i scroll past my mutual wishing me a happy 2018 i scroll past a gifset wishing me a happy 2013 i scroll p
happy 1915 everyone!
happy 1915 everyone!!!
in 2026 DO NOT ask yourself whether your art is GOOD
instead ask:
is it SINCERE
was it CATHARTIC
was it FUN TO MAKE
is it MADE BY ME
and don't forget to stay silly
this is great advice
Jon: dude, public trains are insane! I went on one a few days ago and there was a guy carrying a hamster. just- just on the train! can you believe that?! a hamster!
Damian, uninterested, not looking up from his phone: mhm.
Jon: why aren't you as excited about this as me?
Damian, sighing: because i live in Gotham? last week i took the train with Drake and a man holding a severed pig's head tried to buy him from me for sex.
Tim, from the other room: yeah- i'm still mad you offered him a 75% discount!
this happens awfully often to Tim with all of his brothers, I just know it
#Merry crisis
merry crisis
The greatest minds of this generation are putting all their creative energy into writing pornography for 50 hits on ao3
oh my dear little boys
The infatilization of Louis du Point du Lac and Will Graham within their own fandoms is something that should be studied.
What I mean by this is that somehow, in the narratives of our minds, we—for some reason—turn these very capable, very dangerous, very intelligent men into baby versions of themselves where they're incapable of evil and can cause no harm.
Especially the case of Louis surprises me because it is clear throughout the Interview With the Vampire series (I haven't read the books but I definitely will) it is clear he's not innocent and pure, but rather calculative and a little menace.
I think the moment that showcases that better is the scene that reveals what actually happen when Claudia was turned, and people still seem to overlook that scene and pretend that didn't happen.
I personally haven't finished watching Hannibal because of how gruesome and dark it is, so I can't really dive into Will's infantilization, but it is clear it is something that happen—People tend to put him under this light of only being Hannibal's victim, which don't get me wrong, I do believe he's a victim but that's not the only thing he is.
I believe the whole reason this infantilization happens in the first place is so we can empathize better with these two characters, because their counterpart, Lestat and Hannibal, are meant to be the "meaner" side of the relationship, so poeple overcompensate the fact they're both bad by turning one into a sweet little creature.
To summarize, I believe we should accept all of these characters are flawed beings that can be better or worse depending on the context they're placed in, so please stop pretending Louis and Will are sweet little angels that do nothing wrong yet are consistently wronged.
what if I say that Louis and Lestat are just vampire Hannibal and Will, huh? What then?
Okay, so I'm rewatching Stranger Things and I'm Episode 2 of Season 1, and on the scene where Jonathan shows Will 'Should I Stay or Should I Go" in the back, Joyce is fighting on the phone with Lonnie, and I realized that in Season 5, Karen and Ted's relationship is terrible, so what ir Vecna is targeting children with troubled parental lives.
This has probably been said before, but anywho, it occurred to me that this might be the connection between all the children—They all have troubled lives in one way or the other
just finished watching season 2 of interview with the vampire and hey what the fuck what that
on “the blond,” “the older man,” and other crimes against third-person limited
You know that thing where a story is written in tight third person limited — we’re meant to be inside someone’s head, seeing the world through their thoughts — and then suddenly the narration says “the blond frowned” or “the shorter woman sighed” about a person the POV character knows really well?
That’s called antonomasia — using a descriptive label instead of a name. And it’s fine when we’re talking about strangers: “the cashier handed her the receipt,” “the tall guy blocked the door.” The POV character doesn’t know their names, and we just need a quick way to tell people apart.
But the moment it’s used for someone the POV character already knows, it breaks immersion. Because that’s not how our minds work. We don’t think “the older man smiled at me.” We think “Mark smiled.” Or maybe “my boss” if that relationship matters in the moment.
Third person limited means the narration sits inside someone’s perception. Their inner monologue is the story’s voice. So when you switch from “Mark smiled” to “the blond smiled,” you’ve pulled the camera away from their mind and turned it into an outside shot.
If you want to create distance or irritation, you can do it on purpose —
“The idiot from accounting emailed again.”
That’s character voice. That’s judgment. That works.
But otherwise?
As soon as your POV character knows someone’s name, use it. While we do tend to worry about repetitions, names rarely register as such to the readers.
If you need variety for rhythm, use relational or emotional identifiers that make sense in their head: her friend, his partner, their teacher, the person they loved.
Because inside someone’s thoughts, there are no “blonds” or “brunettes.”
There are only people they know.
Really good explanation of the fundamental problem with this type of writing.
(and why it's one of my huge pet peeves)
a little sleepy but he did it anyway
THIS IS SO CUTE OMG