Glups~ ❤️
Peter Solarz
KIROKAZE
tumblr dot com

@theartofmadeline

No title available

blake kathryn
Xuebing Du
cherry valley forever
Mike Driver
RMH

PR's Tumblrdome
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda
Sade Olutola

pixel skylines
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
wallacepolsom

Product Placement
hello vonnie
trying on a metaphor
Misplaced Lens Cap

seen from Germany

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Türkiye

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany

seen from Georgia

seen from Bulgaria
seen from United States
seen from South Africa
seen from United States

seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from Austria
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from Japan
@mycatateit
Glups~ ❤️
Miss Jones~ 👻💜💕💕💕💕💕💕
Ups~ 😅
i NEED people to realise foreshadowing is. in fact. a literary device. and not a Bad Thing. the audience picking up on your hints is a Good Thing. because. it makes the story and it’s conclusion make sense. and some people will not see those but enjoy seeing them on a second read through. red herrings are one thing but if your novel consists of nothing but red herrings it’s not a coherent story it’s just a collection of paragraphs that don’t actually plausibly link to one another. you're not fighting with the audience you don’t look clever you look like you don’t know how basic fiction works. be vulnerable for once in your goddamn life and don't treat writing like a game to be won where the audience losing is a good thing.
Getting to the end of a story and going "THE CLUES WERE THERE THE WHOLE TIME!" is always joyous for me whether or not I picked up on the clues leading up
If I saw the clues and caught the hints then yes! I am clever and me and the author/creator/artist etc were in on it together the whole time!
If I didn't notice the clues or got fooled but can clearly see them in hindsight then "Ha! You won this time storyteller! I am delighted by this game we play!' and then I enjoy putting the pieces together afterwards and enjoying how clever it was. I feel like the creator respects me as an audience
If there is a "twist" that comes with 0 clues or foreshadowing at all I'm annoyed. I'm pissed off. I feel like I'm being condescended to and patronised. It's not clever or interesting and makes me annoyed I ended up caring about characters and plot points that ended up meaningless.
Because it's not that these stories don't have foreshadowing or plot clues. They just abandon it for a "surprising twist"
A story that pays off the clues is letting me into the fun and makes a participant in the story
A story that just gives me a "shock" but no pay off is telling me not to engage or get attached or care. So why would I watch?
OMG! THIS!
Random plot twists that don't connect to anything in the story are not clever. If we don't see it coming because the writer didn't provide any clues, they aren't clever and it's totally unsatisfying (and I will NEVER read this writer again). These clues need not be lit up in neon with a parade of elephants and showgirls. But they need to be present
I'm a writer and am rarely surprised. Often, if I am surprised it's because the writer was a dumbass and included a "twist" that makes no sense (and therefore isn't really a twist, it's just random bullshit). If a writer genuinely surprises me, without being an absolute dumbass, I am FUCKING DELIGHTED! I will tell everyone I know to read the book/see the movie/watch the show.
Foreshadowing is the reward for paying attention. It's the story letting you in on the secret like a co-conspirator because you're the clever little audience member who has been picking up on the clues the writer has been setting up.
It even makes watching/reading again more worthwhile because if you didn't notice the foreshadowing the first time you have the joy of being able to notice the things you missed!
This is exactly one of the first things I learned about writing. Write the twists, but make it make sense. If the twist doesn't make sense it goes nowhere and does nothing but upset the audience. If it doesn't make sense, it's bad writing trying to look deep and complex.
uh oh
"etymologynerd" is at it again and this time i do feel i have to say something. the disability advocates have it covered on addressing the impact, but there's also a serious problem with the linguistics.
in a video shared on may 16, adam aleksic begins by saying: "i think we have to accept the fact that the 'r-word' [retard/retarded] is permanently coming back and it's functionally changed meanings to no longer directly refer to disabled people."
this first sentence alone betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of language change in several points.
this word never went away. what we're seeing now is an attempt at re-normalization by people who sense that they will not be socially punished by openly using this term.
we actually don't have to "accept" its return to mainstream use. for decades, disability advocates have worked to inform the public of the harm caused by casual use of this term. the harm has not disappeared, and neither will this advocacy and its impacts.
now i'm just mad. how tf does it NOT refer to disabled people? the entire point of a pejorative term is that it negatively invokes comparison to a person, group, etc. the assertion that the r-word has changed meanings is categorically false. at most, its primary context has changed from clinical to casually pejorative, but the insult fundamentally rests upon the original reference.
he goes on to refer to the "euphemism treadmill," another concept he misrepresents by extending the metaphor to say that terms which have been sufficiently distanced from their original reference are no longer pejorative. to quote: "...once we sufficiently distance a word from its historical usage, it stops taking on the same offensive power and just becomes colloquial instead."
which... what? what the fuck is he talking about? the words he uses as examples – idiot, imbecile, and moron – are definitely still offensive, if perhaps less impactful. "just becomes colloquial instead" is a nonsense phrase. are offensive words not colloquial? the only english word that comes to mind as having changed so much in definition as to no longer be offensive is "nice," which has been shifting in meaning for more than 700 years and was never a weaponized clinical term.
he ends by saying, "it is undeniably true that the people who are afraid to say the r-word right now are going to get old and die out, while younger generations keep saying it with no knowledge of where it came from." again, fundamentally misunderstanding language change in society over time. it rests on the assumption that we're all going to start or re-start using this slur and never have a conversation about its harms, which just completely ignores both the abovementioned disability advocacy and the fact that people tell each other not to use offensive words. you think i'm just not gonna teach my kids that using slurs is bad??
the whole video is devoid of both empathy and an understanding of long-term semantic change.
tl;dr etymologynerd is wrong, we do NOT "have to accept that the 'r-word' is coming back," and we all need to read more crip linguistics.
“bits to use in everyday conversations”
Lorelai is I think one of the best written villains/antagonists I know in terms of what feelings she insights.
It's hard to find villains/antagonists that are simultaneously aggravating and sympathetic at the same time, usually they're one or the other. Either sympathetic enough that I can just like them despite their flaws or they're so aggravating that I don't care what's sympathetic about them.
But Lorelai genuinely makes me switch between both feelings mutually. She's truly frustrating and so horrible to Molly and so irresponsible that I can mentally angrily rant about her for half an hour.
but also when she cries I cry, her sad moments and her reasons for being this way hurt so much and she has so many moments that are endearing and relatable to me.
I love her and want the best for her but also I sincerely want to crashout at her.
I always carry the sentiment with villains that I can like them but also not excuse their actions, but with Lorelai my feelings actually match the sentiment. I equally want her punishment and redemption.
Hopefully I can verbalise how this is achieved at some point but for now I just want to say she's so well written. And I hope she both struggles and learns without Molly in the house.
PSA For Digital Artists
Unless your tablet or monitor has some kind of fancy "paper white" lighting option (is that even a thing?) I need you to STOP DRAWING ON A WHITE CANVAS. You are essentially STARING AT A LAMP FOR HOURS.
Save your eyes and use a middle grey canvas instead! My default is hex #8A909B, but you can find what works for you!
I am being so serious right now please stop drawing on a white canvas oh my god you're damaging your eyes no wonder so many digital artists get migraines I thought this was common knowledge but apparently not so please please please take care of your eyes you only get two of them in your whole life and I am begging you to be good to them—
anyone remember what these things are called like little cartoony expressive doohickies i think they have a real name but i can’t remember
im not fucking crazy.
if i have one more person say sparkles on this post im gonna blow i swear to god
They're squeans I'm pretty sure! If they pop like that anyway. But the term for this kind of "symbol to refer to the general vibe of something in art" is called "Emanata" because it emanates from a person or object.
what the fuck. comics are magic
somebody put a quimpsy spurl on my blorbo
she quimps on my jarns til I nittles
i hate when rich people condescend with the whole 'money can't buy happiness' argument like listen. just because buying your fourth car didn't fill the void in your deluded disconnected-from-reality life doesn't mean not having to worry about food/ bills/medicine wouldn't greatly improve the mental health of literally everyone else on the planet
Fun fact: they've done studies and money DOES buy happiness, but it tops out after a certain amount (nowadays around $500,000)
So yeah, having food / bills / medicine & a fair amount of leisure covered by income DOES buy happiness, but excess wealth depletes the effect exponentially.
I want people to focus on the fact that Gabriel Agreste did NOT sacrifice himself, not even at the end. He was dying, he WAS GOING TO die that day because of the cataclysm. The condition for the wish is precisely one life for another (In this especific case). Who would he sacrifice? Marinette for Emilie? He would die, and then why would he resurrect his wife if he couldn't live with her? Nathalie had died, so he couldn't exchange her life for Emilie's. He only exchanged his life for Nathalie's because he realized it was the only option
He is selfish, manipulative, and only thinks about himself
Tumblr can do better!
N
Wtf is wrong with you people
so are fans of the animaniacs called fanimaniacs?
Dad girl Donald dad girl Donald.
In order it’s June, May and April, the little one is his arms is Lena.
10 years later :]
In order, Lottie (DT17 June), Annie (DT17 May) and Webby, the little one in his arms is Shamrock :]
Httyd screenshot you didnt know you needed.
Httyd screenshot you didnt know you needed pt2
still crazy to me that silverfish exist, like in real life, who allowed that shit?