magpie @rottensleepy - Tumblr Blog

beefnburger

The terrorlings and some extras below

#crying screaming throwing up #casually #the terror amc #love jirvs little gay ass angel costume

guiltfactory

you're my brother and to some extent my wife

carlottagiudicellivevo

looking for a vgen artist code if anyone has some to spare!

#monster high fanart #lagoona blue #vgencode

girlnaviy

doodle

#this rendering style makes me drool #i need to take a bite #wow

werewolfsone

Sometimes the JopLittle narrative is too kind to both Jopson and Little. These two men are defined in canon by their relationship with Crozier. Occasionally we go to lengths to make Crozier seem like The Worst because of his drunken mistreatment of Ned, but then we ignore the yummy points of 1) Jopson's extreme dedication to Crozier which does not abate no matter what Crozier does (including mistreating Ned) and 2) Ned's extreme dedication to Crozier which does not abate no matter whatever Crozier does (including mistreating Ned).

There are forces inside Little and Jopson that drive them to remain at Crozier's side even when others are permanently and publicly turned against him. And and: Jopson's and Little's motivations for this can be very ugly. They both believe in class and empire in ways that make them follow orders and refuse to question authority figures even in extreme conditions, even when it puts them in danger. They would both see "inferiors" punished to keep that status quo because that status quo is safe.

At any rate, all this to say that I think Ned and Jops have a lot of room to be meaner in fanfic. xD Even to each other in JopLittle fic. What do y'all think? How does Jopson view Ned's dedication to Crozier and how does Ned view Jopson's?

#yes god please

sgtjakes

THE TERROR 1x7 — HORRIBLE FROM SUPPER

#hes literally never looked better #i think about this shot daily

sizzlingcandyj3llyf1sh

“source?” the mold in my water bottle told me

pngblog

#hickeygibson for those with eyes to see them #the terror amc

jopdaughter

we're just normal men. we're just innocent men.

rosenkranz-does-things

Lady Silence

(and yes I redesigned Tuunbaq because I didn't much care for its show design)

some bear insides progress shots under the cut

vomittedsoap

Girlzzzz

vespermyotis

i think about “this place wants us dead” so very often and im thinking about it again. what an arrogant imperialist thing to believe. why would this place want you dead? are you important enough for this place to want you dead? does this place recognize your blue and white and red flag and understand the authority you think that grants you?

does this place care what happens to you, one hundred odd human men who will live less than a century and do nothing of remarkable interest to it within your lifetimes? this place doesn’t want you dead. it doesn’t know who you are. why would this place care about you at all?

vespermyotis

coming back to this. the idea that white imperialists “aren’t built for” certain climates and landscapes (even the ones they choose to occupy anyway) goes hand in hand with this imo. the noble struggle between white explorer/‘conqueror’ and landscape happens BECAUSE the white man is supposedly so different from the native inhabitants of that landscape. the land is hostile to you because you are from Far Away and it is not hostile to native inhabitants (at least, not in the same ways and to the scale that you believe you are affected) because you are Different from those native inhabitants. your perceived inability to survive in this landscape is a hallmark of your racial/ethnic/cultural superiority. adapting to the landscape (which is assuredly austere but not consciously malicious) is assimilation. and if you assimilate, you forfeit superiority.

you see this is the writing of imperialists from all over europe and america, even the contemporarily left-leaning ones—magnus hirschfeld wrote in world journey of a sexologist of his physical inability as a white german man to withstand heat and humidity in his travels, though he always insisted on wearing a full suit anyway. soviet ethnographers in the mid-twentieth century conducted interviews with/studies on several indigenous siberian groups (the nenets, evenki, chukchi, yupik, et cetera) in order to determine how white soviet settlers could best colonize the siberian arctic and survive the cold.

a lot of this was ‘medical’ research, focused on the biological ways that siberian peoples were acclimatized to the landscape. some of it scorned traditional nomadic lifestyles. brochures were published for the benefit of white would-be settlers hoping to survive an arctic winter. despite the saying-so of indigenous interviewees and professional soviet determinations that fur clothing was crucial to both survival and comfort, the campaign rejected the advice. wearing fur against the skin without underwear, as recommended by interviewees, was ‘unhygienic’ and unbecoming of Modern White Settlers. instead, the brochures recommended that hopeful arctic colonists packed really warm socks.

historian of settler colonialism lorenzo veracini wrote that “settler colonialism is about turning a place and a speciﬁc human material into something else, and, paradoxically and simultaneously, about a speciﬁc human material that remains true to itself in a place that is ‘other’.”

it’s more comforting to believe the land hates you because you are white and european than it is to recognize that the kind of man who has survived the arctic for centuries is not so biologically different from you. it’s certainly easier to read hostility in the natural world than it is to concede to indigenous knowledge. if you do that, how distinct are you from the people and the land over whom you claim dominance?