my number 1 artist pet peeve is artists who constantly complain that they hate their stuff and they don't feel like they're improving when they literally do nothing to improve. like the tools to improve the way you want have existed for hundreds of years do 1 figure study
im trying to write an archetypally scorpion character but somehow its missing the Sauce. As an expert, what would you consider to be essential to a scorpion on the frogs back?
a scorpion is someone in a position to do great harm regardless of whether they want to. they're reviled (or at least believe they are) for their potential to hurt, which usually makes them paranoid and resentful, which in turn drives them to be proactively aggressive and hostile in order to prevent the boot from coming down on them (ie: waiting for the other shoe to drop) by stinging first. when the scorpion lashes out and self-destructs, then, it doesn't matter if they did it out of spite or because they felt threatened. the scorpion stung, and victim and perpetrator both drown in the consequences, muddying the waters of who is to blame.
in my (biased) opinion, paranoia is an essential quality of a scorpion. a reasonable fear of annihilation via rejection is made irrational to the point of dominating their actions and decisions by a combination of hyper-self awareness and social ostracisation or outright abjection, which both feeds and is fed by the scorpion's increasingly erratic behaviour, usually with a precedence behind it (eg: a character with fire powers is feared by and excluded from their community for their destructive potential because as we all know an uncontrolled fire burns indiscriminately; a character from an aristocratic background is unable to win the support and trust of the people who suffered under the cruelty of their ancestors).
Don't bend; don't water it down; don't try to make it logical; don't edit your own soul according to the fashion. Rather, follow your most intense obsessions mercilessly. Only if you do that can you hope to make the reader feel every particle of what you, the writer, have known and feel compelled to share.
Anne Rice, from the forward to a collection of Franz Kafka's Short Stories
One of my biggest literary pet peeves is when historical or history-inspired fiction pretends that "courting" is a synonym for "dating". Usually it's just a one-to-one word swap--in a modern context, these characters would be dating, but this is olden times, so they call it courting instead. Sometimes they'll pretend there's a shade of difference, and that courting is a more serious exploration of marriage or something. But I read a lot of fiction that was actually written during these historical eras, and the word "courting" is never used like that.
Two people do not decide that they are "courting". One person decides to "court" someone else. It's an action, not a stage in the relationship. A man decides to court a woman because he wants to encourage her to have romantic interest in him. He's trying to win her favor. It's not an exclusive relationship--a woman could be courted by multiple men at once. She'll spend time getting to know the guy who's interested in her, but they won't officially define their relationship as one where they only show romantic interest in each other. If they reach a point where they want it to be exclusive, that's when you propose.
There's no middle ground--either you're getting to know each other, or you're committed to marrying each other. This idea of a period where you kind of commit to each other until you decide you definitely want to get married is a modern one, and it occurs in eras where they use the word "dating" to describe it. The closest equivalent I can think of are times and places where they'd talk about a couple "stepping out together", but they're still not calling it "courting". Words have meaning, and the word "courting" has never meant that, so stop using it that way!
the other mild historical disjoint i run into is when people talk about dating in the fifties like it automatically meant exclusivity. the whole reason we have the expression "going steady" is because the default was to or "go around with" or "go out with" multiple people. not in the sense of being in a stable polyamorous vee, but in the sense that archie is actively "seeing" both betty and veronica during the entire time the two girls are competing for his attention and they're both seeing other guys to make him jealous, and nobody involved considers this "cheating."
bizarrely, America has in many ways gotten more conservative about dating since World War II.
People like to tie the shift from courting to dating to the 1920s, but it's actually a bit older than that. (Caveat that everything I'm about to write is about the United States; the same thing may have happened elsewhere, but my sources are about American social history.)
Courtship was something that happened semi-publicly, in large part because women tended to live with family until they married. A man would come to pay a call and sit in the parlor with the woman he was courting ... and usually members of her family, like her parents or siblings (or uncles/aunts and cousins, if she was living with more extended relations). It was about pleasing all of them, and proving to all of them that he intended to marry her.
In the late 19th century, young working-class women started to move out of the family home for work, and not just to the other side of town â to cities across the state where they didn't know anybody. They usually stayed in boarding houses, where the landlady wasn't interested in hosting chaperoned evenings of courtship in front of the fire. As a result, they spent time with men in dance halls and bars, something akin to modern dating. On the positive side, this gave women the independence to make romantic and sexual choices away from their parents' influence. On the negative side, the women taken on dates (disparagingly called "charity girls") were frequently pressured to have sex in exchange for the money spent on them, money they were unable to spend on themselves due to their low wages.
Dating practices then spread to college students around the turn of the century. Among these upper- and middle-class young people with , the idea that the male party was owed sex in exchange for the date was not as much of a thing: dates were public courtship, held without the direct involvement of family members but still under the eyes of the community. This eventually spread out to become an ordinary part of teenagerhood in all classes. And yes, there was no assumption of exclusivity: teenagers were expected and encouraged to date widely, because going steady was a precursor to engagement, which they were too young for. (It was also the norm prior to WWII for couples attending dances to dance with other people at them. It was in fact the male partner's duty to find other people for his date to dance with! And he couldn't leave whoever he was dancing with unless she had a new dance partner.)
Similar to the non-exclusive 19th century courting, 19th century balls were also considered social events and it was thought rude (and sometimes even scandalous, for young unmarried women) to only dance with one person. Even married couples would not be together the whole night, that would spread themselves around to make sure everyone enjoyed the amusement equally
art's darkroom guide for fic writers! part 1: film processing
do YOU want to write about adam's analog photography more in your saw fanfics, but have limited experience with it and don't know where to start? you've come to the right place!
long, image heavy guide under the cut! if you have any specific questions or see any areas for improvement, let me know!
because film processing and printmaking are different processes, i've decided to talk about both and just split them into different posts. so if you're only interested in the red room, picture-making part of the process, don't worry, that guide is coming, too.
my credentials: i've been developing my own film, both color and b&w, for about 7 years now! it's a very rewarding process and, despite how many steps are listed in this guide, it's really not as complex as it seems once you get used to it.
so! you've shot a roll of film. now what?
after a roll of film has been exposed, its negatives hold latent images. these images have to be processed using photochemistry to be visible to the human eye.
note: before film has been developed, it is STILL light sensitive! if the film is exposed to ANY light before it's been properly processed, INCLUDING a red safelight, it can ruin it and erase the images! this is a common misconception i see in fanfictionâred lights are for printmaking, not film processing.
another note: color film and black & white film have DIFFERENT development processes. color film is way more of a pain in the ass in my opinion because the chemicals have to be held at around 102 degrees, which means a water bath and a sous vide. with black and white, you can get away with anything from 68-72 degrees usually. because our boy adam shoots b&w, that's what this guide will cover.
so, the film can't be exposed to light. how do you process it then?
the first step is getting the film out of the canister. this is a film canister:
if you have a properly dark room, meaning any room that you can get so dark you can't see your hand in front of your face, you can go in that room, turn the lights off, and use a can opener to open the canister and pull the film out; the film will be on a little plastic spool.
if, for whatever reason, you didn't have access to a totally dark room, you can also use a special film loading bag like this:
these bags get totally dark on the inside but have arm holes for you to handle the film with; i personally find them cumbersome and prefer just using a room that gets dark, but to each their own.
okay! film out of the canister. now it's time to load it onto a reel. that reel will eventually go into a tank that's designed to keep light out but allow liquid in. this is what that whole set up looks like:
the film goes onto those white reels, then into the tank, then that funnel looking thing is a lid you can pour liquid in and out through, and then that OTHER, flat lid is one you put on to keep from soaking yourself in photochemistry, because we're gonna be turning this whole thing upside down eventually (more on that later).
tanks come in different sizes depending on what kind of film and how many rolls you want to develop at once; a photographer like adam that is taking a LOT of pictures would probably have a multi-reel tank to help save time.
SO. getting the film onto the reel is something a lot of beginners struggle with because, again, it must be done in complete darkness. by touch, you trim off the leader (that differently shaped piece of film that usually sticks out of the canister), and then guide the film onto the reel and start loading it using a back-and-forth twisting motion.
it's easier if you just see it, so here's a video of someone loading a reel with the lights on for teaching purposes.
this process is tough for beginners because the reels can be finicky and you can't see what you're doing. as a rule of thumb, if you have to force it or if you hear any squealing or crunching, you're doing it wrong; pull the film off and start again. once you do this enough times, though, it becomes second nature.
once the whole roll of film is loaded on the reel, you'll use some scissors to cut the end of the film off of its little plastic spool.
next, you'll load your film into the tank and put the funnel lid on. twist the lid until it clicks.
CONGRATULATIONS! you are now allowed to turn the lights back on!
because the tank is light-tight, the entire rest of the film processing can be done in regular, white light, no need for a safelight (safelights are really only for printmaking). just don't open the tank until it's been through all the chemistry!
now it's time to play with chemicals!
b&w processing uses 4 main chemicals:
developer
stop bath
fixer
hypoclear/ilfowash
you can mix your chems up either before or after loading up your film reel, it's personal preference. i usually mix them before so i can just jump right in after my tank is ready.
some sensory notes on the chemicals: the developer is clear when it's fresh, but it loses potency and starts to turn a light amber color over time. stop bath is piss yellow and starts to turn blue/purple when it's going bad. fixer and hypoclear are both clear. to me personally, none of these chemicals have a particularly strong smell EXCEPT fixer, which smells like vinegar.
everything except the stop bath will be mixed with water in some ratio; im not gonna get into that here because that information will always be 1) posted in the darkroom if you're using a communal one 2) included somewhere with your chemicals 3) easily searchable on the internet
so what do all these chemicals do?
developer - makes our latent image into a visible image
stop bath - neutralizes the developer when it's time, because otherwise it will keep acting on the film and cause the negatives to come out too dark
fixer - makes the images permanent!
hypoclear/ilfowash - removes fixer and reduces washing time; also makes the negatives archival, meaning they can be stored and will last much longer
water - at the end of all of this, the film needs to be washed with running water for at least 10 minutes
optional but very helpful, photoflo - this is a surfactant (think soap-like) that helps water slide off the surface of the film during the drying process; this helps you avoid annoying water spots on your dried negatives
note: there are lots of different developers out there, and they can be mixed in different concentrations, i.e. stock, 1:1 (meaning 1 part water to 1 part developer) and so on. my community darkroom uses xtol 1:1, so that's what i have experience with.
alright, you've mixed all your chemicals up and you've got them on standby. the next major important element is timing.
each chemical needs to be with the film for a certain amount of time. the developer's time will vary depending on the concentration of the developer, the type of film, its speed (how light sensitive it is), the temperature of the developers, etc. public darkrooms usually have a chart posted with a bunch of these times for reference. they're also searchable online.
as a general rule, the hotter the water, the less development time you need, and the higher speed (i.e. the more light-sensitive) film you have, the longer you need ( for example, p3200 is a VERY light-sensitive film that i love for concert photography, but it has an ungodly long 18-minute development time). i would say the average is somewhere in the 7-10 minute range.
you'll basically pour a chemical in, agitate the tank for the specified length of time, pour that chemical back out, and move to the next one.
what do i mean by agitate?
remember when i said we'd be turning the tank upside down at some point? this is where that comes in.
with all of these chemicals, you'll be turning the tank upside down and back again constantly for the first thirty seconds, and then for five seconds every thirty seconds after that.
this video is a good example of what the agitation looks like! you'll do that motion constantly for the first 30 seconds after pouring your chemical in, and then for 5 seconds at a time every 30 seconds for the rest of the time. then you would pour that chemical out and pour the next one in, repeating the same process.
writing note: this is a GREAT time for someone's mind to wander while they're working on their film. this process is just mindless enough that it doesn't need your full attention, but it's also just time-sensitive enough that you can't just wander off and do something else. also, if you're using a multi-reel tank, this shit gets heavy. your arms get tired.
sensory note: even with that flat lid that goes on our tank, some liquid leaking is inevitable. the photochemistry isn't particularly harmful to get on your hands unless you have sensitive skin; the worst it's ever done to me is make my hands really dry. if you're responsible you might wear gloves, but i'm not, and probably neither is adam "sticks his hands in shit water" stanheight.
once your film has been through all of its chemicals and its ten minute wash, it's finally time to dry it! optionally, you can mix some photoflo (soap-like photochemical) with some water, dip your fingers in that, and run your fingers squeegee-like over the film to help get the water off. this helps the film dry evenly without water spots. you can also use a tiny squeegee made specially for film to help jump-start the drying process.
for drying your film, you can just hang it up somewhere dust-free to dry overnight, OR sometimes a public darkroom will have a heated film drying cabinet, which can get the job done in about 45 minutes. to be honest, idk how much these cabinets go for (especially in 2001-2004), but i doubt adam has one in his apartment, so let's just say he probably hangs his film to dry.
note about dust: dust is your enemy. any speck of dust that gets onto a negative will show up as a super noticeable white spot on your prints, and you'll have to find it and blow it off. the more you can avoid exposing the negatives to dust, the better.
once the negatives are nice and dry, you'll cut the film into strips and load them into a sheet like this:
congratulations!!!! you processed your film!!!
the next step in the process would be getting back into the darkroom and working on contact sheets and prints! i will cover that process in a part 2 to this guide :)
if you read until the end, congratulations! i know that was a lot of information, but it truly doesn't feel as complicated as it sounds when you're doing it yourself.
if you have any questions, feel free to message me! also, if you read this whole guide and have feedback for the next one, i'm open to that as well!
People forget that in a medieval or pseudo-medieval setting, religion wasnât just a personal choice it was power. Queens like Alicent werenât âfanaticsâ for being devout; they were playing the game their society demanded. Being visibly pious, upholding moral and religious norms, and embodying fertility and virtue strengthened their legitimacy and influence.
Historically, Every powerful queen or empress had to be religious to wield authority effectively.
I have to remind Rhaenyra stans who call Alicent a âreligious fanaticâ that the historical Empress Matilda one of the real-life inspirations for Rhaenyras character was herself deeply religious:
Matilda had remained in Germany during this episode (the continua- tion to Frutolfâs chronicle notes that Henry left her ânear the borders of Lotharingiaâ); empresses might have played a greater role in running their husbandâs affairs than many other consorts, but their duties did not include riding into battle. Instead she concentrated on less martial matters. Matilda had always been conventionally pious, adhering to the tenets of the church and employing household chaplains, and her name appears on a number of documents relating to churches and abbeys. In May 1125 we can place the imperial couple together at Duisburg, where, at his wifeâs request, Henry made grants to the abbey of St Maximin at Trier, a place Matilda may have remembered fondly from her visits with Archbishop Bruno while she was under his tutelage as a girl. The elderly Bruno had died the previous year, so perhaps this request had a special significance for her.âMarjorie Chibnall, The Empress Matilda: Queen Consort, Queen Mother and Lady of the English
Matilda was described as âconventionally pious, adhering to the tenets of the church and employing household chaplainsâ and actively involved in supporting churches and abbeys. Her religious devotion shaped her public role, her correspondence, and even her political actions. She followed church practices rigorously, which was both a reflection of her personal faith and a necessary component of queenship.
The concept of queenship was inseparable from religion. A queenâs authority and legitimacy were not purely political; they were deeply tied to religious imagery, ritual, and symbolism.
The Virgin Mary was the main model for queens: she represented intercession (praying on behalf of people) and motherhood. Medieval queens were expected to act in similar ways. During a coronation, the rituals and oaths reminded the queen and everyone watching of her duties: to be fertile, moral, and a link between the king and the people. The queenâs power and legitimacy were reinforced by these public ceremonies and visual images.
âThe Virgin Mary was largely identified by her roles of intercessor and mother, also the main duties assigned to the queen. As a result, associating the queen with Mary was a logical way to disseminate expectations of the queenâs duties, not only to the queen herself, but to her subjects as well.ââ'Queen Consort, Queen Mother: The Power and Authority of Fourteenth-Century Plantagenet Queens'
Symbols mattered too. For example, queens held a floriated sceptre, connecting them to Mary and biblical figures like Aaron and Jesse, emphasizing both their divine link and human lineage. Iconography like the âtree of Jesseâ or depictions of ancestors reinforced that queens were expected to provide heirs and continue the royal line. Even pageants, churchings, and tombs stressed these maternal and intercessory roles.
There was no separation of church and state; religion was woven into law, custom, and the legitimacy of the monarchy itself. Being religious back then wasnât âbadâ or weird it was literally part of the job. Modern ppl get mad about it bc weâre used to thinking religion is personal, not a state requirement. So when they see a religious queen following the rules of her time, theyâre like, âSheâs a fanatic!â But in reality sheâs just doing her queen duties.
The collection this comic is part of is available to buy now! 100% of profits will be donated to Medical Aid for Palestinians, the PCRF and CareforGaza in a 40/40/20 split.
BUY HEART-EATERS NOW
kissing eyelids in the dead of winter @projectdaydream - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
