Jagged Jot

Ari (they/them)

[apatheticfluorescence]

some hyper famous artists like Van Gogh transcend overratedness and become underrated because they're so normalized. Like I'll look at a van Gogh and I'm like wait this really is amazing you guys don't get it

[headspace-hotel]

Shakespeare is like this

[insufferablepirate]

Every time I see a Van Gogh that’s not one of his better known pieces it absolutely blows me away

Have you seen this shit my liege? smh unreal

[art-is-art-is-art]

Veranda, Ivan Kramskoy

[handweavers]

"violence is never justified under any circumstances" types when you tell them that they have already implicitly accepted that violence is sometimes justified by expressing ambivalence if not outright allegiance to capitalist politicians and systems of governance. you have already accepted that violence, under certain circumstances, is at least tolerable if not entirely reasonable and necessary, and you assert that all the time. you have already decided what sort of violence is okay to you

[slaygentford]

so sick that Lestat’s first confession of loneliness came in a theater sitting in the audience and the second one came as a performance on the stage. God

[zegalba]

The circular island that rotates in Argentina

[yusiyomogi]

what people often don't realize about "dear, this is a stein" scene in s2e4 is that it's not even super important if armand put those photos there or not. i can easily imagine the scenario that talamasca did it, for example, in order to put more tension between two powerful vampires.

what mattered the most in that scene (and their subsequent argument) is that it revealed hidden dynamic in dubai apartment. and i think once you fully realize all the implications of that scene, you'll also realize that there's no point at all to defend armand with technicality of "who did this".

season 1 depicted louis as someone who had full power in the apartment, since armand was pretending to be a member of the staff, someone who served louis. after it's revealed to be a disguise, armand and louis give another, more subtle performance instead: that they're equals, that they're romantic partners who do everything together. there are some suspicious details you can notice in their interactions etc, but they're almost always downplayed, made to be seen as some sorta compromise ("could i see the pages we removed?" - "we made an agreement").

and the thing is, this is the first moment when we see something very clear in their dynamic, something bigger than all the hints we got before it. the scene still doesn't say it explicitly, but it's a great opening for what's gonna be revealed in s2e5. so it's still subtle but it's also not subtle enough to be ignored anymore.

the show does some interesting things there, and i greatly enjoy thinking about them. let's look at some of them closely.

the first thing that happens after louis looks at the photographs is that he starts questioning armand. there's almost no hesitation, he immediately looks at armand and asks him "what is this?".

he also looks very distressed, even though from our pov there is seemingly no reason to think it's something more than misunderstanding or mistake in archival process. and it reveals two fascinating things at once:

1) louis is already on high-alert mode with armand, he already suspects that armand is doing something behind his back specifically to mess with his mind (and we'll come back to "mess with his mind" part a bit later).

2) armand has more control over the house than anyone else, including louis: louis immediately assumes that armand would know who put it there even if louis himself doesn't. he's asking him like he's the owner of the archive, even though it's mostly about louis' life.

and let's look at how the show masterfully frames the dynamic between two of them visually. louis is squatting of the floor in order to look at photographs, but he technically doesn't have to. this is deliberate creative decision: louis is positioned in the shot to once again look up at armand from the lower point, while armand looks down on him. it's the framing of adult talking to a child, not someone equal. very similar thing was done in s1e7 as well.

and here's the iconic line: "dear, this is a stein". armand is very condescending here, maybe a bit ironic. instead of putting himself to louis' level, like trying to look at the photos himself and maybe make some believable theories, he uses the situation to frame louis as the "hysterical" and "unreasonable" one. so even if armand didn't do this, his reaction reveals that he doesn't take louis seriously and (at the very least) doesn't mind that it makes louis look delusional in front of other people.

meanwhile louis looks increasingly anxious and desperate to be believed to. he wants to hear validation that he's not out of his mind. this is clearly not the first time something like this happened: the way louis also immediately tries to defend and explain himself demonstrates that it's a common occurrence in the house that he gets blamed for "weird" things like this. and it seems like usually armand is both the source of accusation and comfort: he implies the possibility that louis is delusional and he also calms louis down, gives him possible excuses. it's a routine.

and speaking of dismissing louis, let's look at the next thing armand does. louis asks him questions, but armand answers to daniel. the same exact thing will happen in s2e6 too when armand explains the whole san francisco incident (not looking in louis' direction at all). this is the most clear display of power: armand is calm and collected, not even looking at louis, but talking to his guest instead. there's a message here, it's like he's saying "you see, dear guest, louis sometimes acts out, but let's not blame him because he's not healthy".

another interesting thing about their dynamic: louis takes this! he's still pissed off obviously (and they will continue to argue about this later), but instead of pushing back and at least standing up to look armand in the eyes, he stops questioning him. because it's embarrassing. and now he's put in the situation where he has to apologize and explain himself to daniel. the framing is not a genuine confusion or misunderstanding, the framing is pure humiliation. and this is exactly why this scene is often compared to the painting scene in 'gaslight (1944)'.

and speaking of gaslighting, we see this scene developing into the full-blown argument later in their bedroom. and once again, the show is framing louis as standing below armand. and once again, louis looks very distressed over the situation next to mostly calm armand. and at this point it may seem like louis is simply paranoid or delusional. but this time around the audience for this is not daniel, but us and louis himself. here's another key line that reveals another hidden dynamic between louis and armand:

at this point in the show "you sure about that?" may seem like genuine frustrated reaction from armand, who's tired of being accused. and it could even be genuine! but it demonstrates how he react to louis' "paranoia": instead of finding ways to stop it or ease it, he deflects this paranoia back on louis himself.

and remember, louis already experienced hallucinations and memory lapses, louis already has doubts in his own sanity. at this point of time, he's convinced that armand knows what's better for him. so why put it there, why feed into that doubt even more? because it's all about control.

but what's also interesting, louis doesn't easily accept the excuses this time. he fights back. and he once again brings up what he thinks armand is doing: messing with his mind, trying to "coddle him". as dutifully as louis plays his role of the owner of the house, he's very aware of his position in relation to armand and what kind of control armand has over him.

and not only he's aware of it, he basically accepts this totally fucked up thing as some frustrating but unavoidable part of their life together: he's stressed, he's fighting back, he's yelling, but he's still in the bedroom with armand. they're gonna sleep in the same bed after this. it's a common occurrence that's normalized in their home.

and this theme will continue to be explored in more details in s2e5 and s2e6 ("maitre only when it's hot and convenient" - "that's how i took it"). but it was already there in s2e4.

[occidentalist]

The thing is, I’m not even particularly opposed to Egyptian artefacts being in museums around the world. I really am not, I’m a firm believer as an Egyptian that the entirety of the ancient world is all of our shared history as a species, none of it is more ‘mine’ than it is yours, or anyone’s. I think it can get really reactionary and bourgeois really fast when people allow themselves to get nationalistic and territorial about their people’s ancient past and accomplishments, and we’ve seen firsthand how appeals to ancient greatness and sowing nationalism that way can be deployed to distract the people from their depreciating material conditions under an imperialist-installed regime. But it’s not all without context is it. The fact artefacts from the history of the imperial periphery specifically are scattered across the globe is not a phenomenon that came to exist by happenstance and in a vacuum. The fact that like only 9 out of the 29 obelisks discovered in Egypt are still on the continent isn’t because Europe just started sprouting granite pillars in the 19th century. So every time I read about some new ancient Egyptian exhibit somewhere half the world away, my first thought will always be “I wonder which era of colonial plunder they got this one from.” Which kind of poisons the well a bit

[shop5]

Happy March 15th to those who celebrate.

[werewolfoffeverswamp]

the phasmid in disco elysium has to be in the 99.99th percentile of effectiveness for characters that, when i actually interacted with them first, changed my perception of the entire world a piece of media had built up. like DE, pre-phasmid, has some wondrous magical realism kind of elements that appear more as you progress (the existence of the pale and its whole deal, harry’s skills allowing him insight he should not have, etc) that juxtapose some of the more gritty and real aspects (we’re investigating a murder here. and an extremely politically and emotionally charged one at that) but i just feel like the phasmid’s appearance really solidifies that yes, this game does feature serious topics and interactions that are desperate and sad and violent, but oh my god we have to keep going. like oh my GOD we have to keep living so bad. there’s hope and here is wonder still undiscovered by the rest of the world. there’s more to see out there and while we have that we have to continue seeking it out. things can be strange and impossible and beautiful and so sad at the same time and i want to see it all. all bc this big fuck-off insect that looks like a clump of reeds told me to do it for the working class. nods. okay phasmid. okay

[werewolfoffeverswamp]

[aphony-cree]

What if Buffy's mom hadn't found out about slaying at the end of season 2 and Buffy had to convince Spike to stay in town and pretend to be in a band with her because that was the cover story they'd told Joyce

[fluffyspuffy]

And then eventually end up accidentally actually starting a band because it’s easier than maintaining the lie

[aphony-cree]

Joyce says they can use the garage to rehearse and she always makes them snacks. Buffy starts to worry she'll never get Spike to leave

[fluffyspuffy]

Buffy insists on calling the band Slayer and Spike keeps failing to convince her that there’s already a band with that name

[disco-tea]

Low key I feel like Buffy would just see it as a cover and it’s a ‘fake band’ but Spike gets like way into it and it’s a Real Band™️ to him and he’s a little annoyed Buffy doesn’t take it as seriously. He’s always like “you missed practice this Tuesday what the hell’s up with that. We have a gig next week btw”

[saunteringvaguelydownwards]

#he starts trailing after her on patrol to bitch about missing practice or how she's sloppy on her chords #starts pitching in on the slayage because vampires keep interrupting his tirades #''EXCUSE ME we are having a ROW'' *stakes fledgling* #no chip necessary spike is literally the guy in the band with zero chill about the band #he undeads the band. he unbreathes the band. he spends all his time not sleeping... on the band. #(willow is their manager xander is the merch guy) #(giles was secretly plotting to lure spike into a trap until he notices spike is... actually better at corralling buffy on patrol than he is #because spike doesn't want her injuring her hands or doing anything that fucks with her breath control) #(giles is also weak to the nostalgia of it all and tunes their instruments when he thinks they're not looking) #(when faith arrives mid-S3 she's quickly recruited to sing backup) (via @entirelytookeen)

[muffinlance]

@worldsokayestdragon :

#spike after learning Oz plays guitar: why İsn't he in the band? #buffy: he's already in his own band. which is actually a real band unlike our fake band that you keep forgetting is just a cover story #spike: we're never going to make it in the music industry if you don't stop calling our band fake

Spike (with reluctant but knowledgeable backup from Giles) finally convinces her that "Slayer" risks bringing copyright lawyers down upon their heads, a fate worse than vampires

Buffy turns around and re-names their band "Fake"

[esmeralda-anistasia]

#Buffy at their next concert: hi this is my Fake band and you're at my Fake concert#Fake band fans go NUTS when the Fake lead singer pulls her signature move: peacing out mid-song to go beat up some guys out back#Meanwhile: extended guitar and drum solos#the fans eat. that. gimmick. up.#Buffy returning covered in blood an hour later: oh god you're still going. Okay Fake second song here we go#and the crowd goes WILD

[carlottagiudicellivevo]

I think one of the big ironies of the media literacy crisis going on is that a lot of people have taken the need to approach things with nuance and understand character depth to mean every single character’s flaws in a given work should be taken as weightily and as as much of a contributor to an atmosphere of dysfunction as every other character’s flaws, regardless of what the work in question actually says on the matter or even how dysfunctional the dynamics in question are. You can ask people to look for shades of grey in the narrative and they’ll respond by throwing dark grey sludge over everything.

[carlottagiudicellivevo]

#This is the ‘everyone sucks equally’ readings of iwtv in a nutshell#the insistent dead dove readings of Claudeleine are like. Own that you’re horny bc the academic word salad is just coming off as ableist#the instinct to say Claudia is equally culpable as her wrongdoers is misogynoir#and while we’re here? The dumb racists posting this week how Louis is equally to blame re the book being published after the clip dropped#ohhh he didn’t SAY he rescinded consent ohhhh he was mean to Daniel who was consistently racist to him oh he aired lesmand’s dirty laundry#☝️🤓 this is the bad people show (and they throw in Claudia the one person he did wrong. For cover)#while utterly failing to analyze Louis’ reactions as part of a very justified response to people who wronged him#I respect none of you. Anyway

this was legit about 75% of what inspired this post. the other 25% was the more general and less hateful but still really fucking annoying fandom tendency to reduce literally anyone to hapless idiots, including very competent and experienced characters in situations in which they are well-suited (or treating a competent person in a situation where they do make mistakes or even just lose their temper as a major personal dysfunction/loss of intelligence)

[dakeus-art]

I've always loved drawing swamps and water lillies

And ladies covered in blood

[coldeveryseason]

it's actually pretty meta that the first thing most fans are hearing about the story of iwtv s3- a show that's preoccupied with theme of memory, personal subjectivity and how a narrative gets shaped by what's omitted from it as much as what's included in it- are set leaks of debatable credibility that have been filtered through several heavily biased fandom sources. and everyone's trying to piece together what "actually" happens, "how true" the leaks are and speculating on what the objective canon is. great job y'all let's give ourselves a virtual pat on the back, this is a top-tier iwtv exercise

[diasdelfuego]

the thing about art is that sometimes you'll be moved to tears by stuff that is not very good

[diasdelfuego]

every time this post gets a comment like this i kill another hostage

[lateautumnnights]

🍁🎡🍁Fall fairs 🍁🎡🍁

[infinitelyweary]

There seems to be at least two separate instances in the trailers we’ve seen so far where Lestat is hallucinating Louis and both times dream!Louis is wearing the clothes he wore when he was first turned by Lestat (even seems to look damp from the rain). What do you think this means compared to the Lestat hallucinations from last season where Louis saw him in a variety of outfits? I feel like there may be a connection since we know Louis liked taking Lestat clothes shopping in S1Ep1 which is one of the reasons we saw Lestat in so many different outfits? And maybe Lestat misses his wife so bad next season he keeps hallucinating her in her wedding dress? 😂

Omg hi 😚💕

I try not to dabble too much in speculation but this is interesting to consider....it's possible that we will end up seeing Dreamlou in various outfits in s3 but you're right, in the trailer we only see him in what appears to be his turning garb

My first thought was kinda cynical, that since we know Lestat is hallucinating various ppl (like Nicki) in addition to Louis that maybe it was simplest to have Dreamlou just have one costume? But on a character level, I do think it could make sense for Lestat to remember Louis in this outfit when he pictures him.

The night of Louis's turning is his final moments as a human, and the last moments Lestat could read Louis's mind. We know that Lestat had insecurities about not feeling loved by Louis later in the relationship, but when Louis was human, Lestat felt all the love he had for Louis returned to him.

Lestat seems pretty bummed to lose access to Louis's mind post-turning (calls it a 'humbling' experience and a 'sacrifice') its clearly something Lestat would have preferred not to have given up if it weren't required to have Louis as a companion. I think with Louis having trouble articulating his feelings (esp ones of emotional intimacy/closeness, which he never experienced before Lestat and are completely new and overwhelming for him; not to mention "I love you" being a sore spot after Paul's death), and Lestat being fairly emotionally needy/needing verbal reassurance* of Louis's feelings to feel loved, losing that easy access to Louis's thoughts would mean losing confirmation that Louis loves him.

Like bear in mind that after their hookup, Louis spent weeks avoiding Lestat while Lestat was waiting on his balcony night after night for Louis to come to him. There was no expression of love or affection at all from Louis, but Lestat felt sure that Louis returned his love because he could look into Louis's mind and see it; sure enough that he was determined to take Louis as his immortal companion. The strongest and clearest proof Lestat feels of Louis's love, he loses when Louis is turned.

And of course, Louis nodding his head and agreeing to accept Lestat as his companion is the most powerful voluntary expression of love Louis gives him. Lestat really bares himself to Louis in the church, showing him the monstrous destructive parts of him as well as his poetic, deeply loving side. In their courting phase, Lestat tried to only share the 'good' parts of himself: romantic, understanding, a good listener, a pleasant companion, etc; but now he's sharing the nasty parts too. Sam has spoken in interviews about Lestat fearing being 'unlovable' because of the monstrous parts of him. In the church he makes himself very emotionally vulnerable by showing Louis all of him, offering himself up, thorns and all.

"The crux, the reality of Lestat is that he knows he's also terrifying. And potentially unlovable ...That's why when he does his proposal, and he says 'I wanna be with you forever', he does it immediately after he's put his fist through a priest's head. So he's like, 'This is who I am'."

And Louis accepts him with a kiss.

You can see how moved Lestat is just remembering this night by his dreamy-eyed expression in 207, overcome with the tenderness of the memory even in the insane circumstances of the trial.

It's possible this moment was the most loved Lestat ever felt, by Louis, but also maybe by anyone. His greatest fear is being alone forever because of his monstrous nature, so being seen for all that he is and accepted and loved anyway... He only asked Louis to nod his head and say yes, but Louis went even further and wanted to kiss him, even after seeing the horror Lestat is capable of... I think it makes total sense for this to be what Lestat thinks of when he thinks of Louis. The love he felt from Louis in this moment, the love he lost when they separated, is the ghost Lestat is haunted by.

(I am obsessed with your imagery of Lestat imagining his wife in her wedding dress all the time 😖💖 bc yeah basically that!!!)

Despite what I said about Lestat's mourning the loss of access to Louis's mind, I think it's also notable that Lestat envisions Dreamlou with his vampiric eyes, so post-turning, after Louis's acceptance and after their bond has been formed, vs picturing human Louis, whose mind he could still read. I think this moment right after Louis has been turned is probably the most secure Lestat felt in the relationship, since he spent all that time having access to Louis's mind before this night and then it was all confirmed when Louis agrees to be his companion. It's kinda all downhill after this point, when Louis starts fighting his vampiric nature/wanting to return to his human life etc, but at THIS MOMENT Lestat probably feels like he's found the perfect companion and everything is gonna be great forever from now on

If we compare with Louis/Dreamstat, I think you could read it as Louis felt more of the peaks and valleys of their relationship, loving Lestat and hating him, the sharp contrast of the good and bad of their time together. Since Louis's feelings for Lestat have always been conflicted ones, when he looks back on their relationship, he might see it more in terms of variance/high and low points

The highs:

And the lows:

(even though Louis is seeing Dreamstat in a fond light in this scene I feel like the trial would objectively stand out as a low point in their relationship...but maybe Louis truly looks back fondly on some parts of it, like getting to hear Lestat sincerely complimenting Claudia, which was near-unheard of in their Rue Royale days)

By contrast, you could read Lestat only seeing Louis in one outfit as being symbolic of the consistent nature of his love for Louis. Louis's feelings were conflicted and he saw Lestat in different lights throughout the relationship, but Lestat was never conflicted over loving Louis, so maybe he always saw Louis in that same light as he did in the beginning.

OR, you could read Lestat's focus on the night of Louis's turning as that night being the high point that Lestat wanted to get back to over the course of their relationship; as things deteriorated between them, he always sought to recapture that incredible feeling of being loved he felt from Louis when he accepted his dark gift.

So when Lestat says this:

Maybe Lestat doesn't mean he was waiting the past seven years of Louis's depression, but maybe he's been waiting since that first night, for Louis to make him feel as loved as he did then. He's waited patiently as Louis adjusted to vampirism, all the while eagerly looking forward to the day that Louis accepts him again the way he did in the church all those years ago...I imagine Lestat craves that feeling of unconditional acceptance, wishes he could feel it all the time, and would stay with Louis forever, through any amount of conflict, as long as there's a chance Louis could make him feel that way again...hence him asking Louis to just tell him if that's never going to happen ("Say, 'Lestat, I'm never going to love you'") put him out of his misery so he can stop hoping.

So I guess those are my thoughts........that maybe Louis sees Lestat in terms of the breadth of their relationship, all their different ups and downs, and Lestat sees Louis in terms of that first night, that promise of love Louis showed him when he accepted Lestat with a kiss, and Lestat's feeling of being robbed of that over the course of the relationship. Lestat viewing things in a more stagnant way is in accordance with this Sam quote about Lestat only remembering the good when he looks back on their relationship, only envisioning the love when he envisions Louis:

So the Louis that Lestat felt most loved by is the Louis he remembers when he thinks of him.

It will be interesting to see if we do end up having Dreamlou in different outfits and what outfits they choose. Like I kinda hope I'm wrong about all this lol just bc I wanna see more flashback Louis ensembles 😖 But if they do just stick with the wedding outfit I can see why!

Thanks for the ask ☺️

*An aside re: Lestat's neediness and Louis's communication difficulty, but I feel like Lestat is a classic example of anxious attachment style:

And Louis is fearful-avoidant:

Which sums up a lot of their issues around communicating/showing love. Imagine that someone with an anxious attachment could just pop into their fearful-avoidant partner's head whenever they're feeling unloved and see - 'yeah, ok, they still love me, all good!' It would be hugely comforting, and losing that would be absolutely crazy-making, so I can see why it affected Lestat so much (and why he is so jealous that Claudia gets that access to Louis he can never have again)

[against-stars]

amell: so this is probably a long shot but can you guys help me exorcise a child?

irving: oh yeah sure, all it takes is some lyrium and a bunch of mages, which we obviously have in spades here at the circle. no problem.

amell: ……. then instead of letting templars murder the apprentices who fail their harrowings, you could just exorcise them and allow them to retake the test at a later date with further studies and more effective preparation, as opposed to springing a life-or-death gauntlet on us in the middle of the night with no understanding of what we might face?

irving: haha don’t be silly

[spiritbladed]

#except…there’s no such thing as further study #you either are a person who gives into temptation or you are not #demons lie and manipulate and press on your weak spots to get you to do what they want #you are either vulnerable to that or you are not #there is no way around it #every mage must be stronger than their demons. no exceptions.

two fun things here about how completely wrong this is: first of all, this fails to take into account that exactly what the harrowing entails is a closely-guarded secret from the apprentices, which means as far as anyone growing up in the circle, ages approximately five to twenty-something, are aware, at some point in your late teens/early twenties, Something Happens and you either graduate as a mage, are turned tranquil, or “mysteriously disappear” aka DIE. so you tell me how level-headed and calm you’re going to be when your prison guards wake you up at midnight and tell you it’s time to take your final exam, where you only have a 1 in 3 chance of coming out of it whole, and once you get to the test room, you’ve got a fifty-fifty chance of just being flat out murdered if you don’t reach their arbitrary time limit. you don’t even have to outright fail the test! you just have to be “too slow.”

if demons press on weak spots, it’s because the circle creates them. they enforce vulnerability, fear, and distrust. how many mages who “failed” their harrowing did so only because they were forced into a position they never would have if they’d just, like, lived their own normal-ass lives? how many tranquil chose the rite over the fifty-fifty chance of fucking dying in case they took what the templars decided was “too long”?

if the harrowing, which itself is cruel and pointless, were at least something openly known, something mages were aware of being prepared for, and not something built up during their entire childhood and adolescence as a looming death sentence for them to be thrown into in the middle of the night, then perhaps they would be going into it with the kind of tools a mage might actually be able to use to resist future temptation.

you cannot throw someone into the deep end and then say “you should have known how to swim”  when they begin to drown.

second of all, we have actual canon examples of mages who have been possessed, been exorcised, and subsequently never been possessed again. connor, the above example being described, will go on to be a perfectly normal (if, you know, traumatized) mage, and in the red lyrium future he is shown to have spent up to a year resisting the pressure of a demon, possibly even the same demon who found him as a child, and refusing to allow its possession to the very bitter end. fiona (a harrowed mage) is possessed during the calling, exorcised by the rest of the party, and then clearly never re-possessed again.

exorcising someone who has been possessed in a safe and secure environment and saying “okay, how do we better arm you for the future so you can protect yourself from this happening again” would be the way to handle the potential threat of demons without just murdering people out of hand. it’s clearly possible in-canon, and refusing to do it is deliberately condemning people to avoidable deaths because they may have made a single mistake.

so finally: fuck that noise. the harrowing is pointless cruelty designed to cull, not to educate, and it’s not a sign of who is stronger than a demon.

[warpedlegacy]

Not to mention that by the Chantry’s own fucking logic, Harrowed mages should be safe to reintegrate into society, yet they continue to be locked up for the remainder of their lives, “just in case”. So which is it? Does the Harrowing prove a mage is capable of controlling themselves or doesn’t it? And that’s not even consistently enforced! If you jump through enough hoops, play nice enough, have the right connections, AND get lucky, then maybe they’ll agree to let you out now and again. So like… gee. It’s almost as if those Circles are fucking pointless.