Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
Not today Justin
Acquired Stardust
sheepfilms
occasionally subtle

Kaledo Art

@theartofmadeline
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Show & Tell

Love Begins
Cosmic Funnies

tannertan36
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
Peter Solarz

Kiana Khansmith
todays bird

shark vs the universe
Sade Olutola
RMH

ellievsbear

seen from Belgium
seen from Belgium
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Switzerland
seen from Romania
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Switzerland
seen from Japan

seen from United States
seen from United States

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

seen from United States
seen from United States
@stareena
“Peter [Hogan] doesn’t like it when I’m too literal because the magic of the book is you never know whether Neverland is a real place or if it’s Wendy’s mind. But it does say, Barrie’s quite clear, if you could stay awake while you’re asleep, you’d find your mother tidying up your mind, much like she tidies up drawers. She takes all the pretty thoughts and puts them in the top and she takes all the evil dark ones and hides them in the box so you can’t find them in the morning. And the Neverlands are a place inside children’s minds, which have not just pirates and adventures, but first days at school and nasty tasting medicine and math sums, and it’s kind of this strange, surreal land. So my interpretation is, Wendy is placed in this horrible position where she’s told she has to grow up. And growing up in those days meant marriage and kids and knitting. There was no kind of, hanging around with an iPod, dancing in the mall. So, she goes to this place, maybe in her imagination, maybe not. In order to help her work this out, there’s someone there who’s never going to grow up, who represents staying childish for the rest of her life, and someone who represents the very worst and the very best things about growing up. So there’s this repulsive creature, [who] she’s strangely attracted to, who looks a little bit like her dad, oddly enough. Because who do little girls think about when they think about being married? They think about being married to their dad”
— Jason Isaacs’ theories when asked why Mr. Darling and Captain Hook are always played by the same actor. (IGN, Jeff Otto, 23 Dec 2003)
Everyone thirsting over Descendants Captain Hook obviously never watched the 2003 version with Jason Isaacs
They even introduced him TOPLESS
Jason Isaacs and his legacy of Handsome Bad Guys...
Didst thou ever want to be a pirate, my hearty?
Jason Isaacs as Captain James Hook PETER PAN (2003)
PINQUI'S ALL-TIME FAVORITE VILLAINS │ (1/?) — CAPTAIN HOOK PETER PAN (1953) dir. Hamilton Luske, Clyde Geronimi, and Wilfred Jackson
Disney's "Peter Pan", BEHIND THE SCENES (Released on Feb 5th, 1953)
For the 1 Anon who asked
I present my Hook tutorial Probably has too much or too little information in some areas But is sorta just more notes to myself what I've noticed or refined in how i go about drawing him... Enjoy
an abrupt end for sure, but if there's interest I am happy to elaborate on more areas...
Also my consistency on drawing is very poor so I wont/cant draw the same thing the same way all the time :V apologies for that ( an any spelling mistakes )
However this was fun :D
Bonus drawing that i made that doesn't really fit Kinda just a guide of his clothes i think?
"...Captain C'Hook "
HOOK. IS NOT. A COWARD.
Recently, I’ve been perusing various articles and podcasts about Disney’s Peter Pan, and while I always enjoy hearing what fellow fans of the film have to say, as a Hook fan, one recurring theme that really grates on my nerves is how many people refer to Hook as a cowardly villain. Is he high-strung? Definitely. Does he suffer from an anxiety disorder? Probably. But is he a coward? I don’t think so.
I mean, let’s think about this for a second. First of all, even if you’re NOT being actively chased by a crocodile, it’s probably reasonable to say that most people who aren’t Steve Irwin would prefer to maintain a pretty healthy distance between them and something with so many teeth. Now consider that this crocodile has already a EATEN A BODY PART of yours. Still not convinced? Let’s look at the size of this thing…
So, though we’re never given a specific height, I’d say it’s safe to assume that Hook is a pretty tall guy. Hans Conried, who voiced Hook and was the live-action reference model for the animators was around 6’2”, so for simplicity’s sake, let’s assume that’s how tall Hook is too. The largest modern (captive) crocodile on record is a saltwater croc named Lolong, who measured around 20’3” and had a skull length of about 2’3.5”. This is a picture of him alongside some humans for size reference. He’s humongous, right???
But Hook’s crocodile is clearly no ordinary animal because it’s EVEN BIGGER. This crocodile is so large that it can fit a grown 6ft+ man STANDING UP in its mouth. And its snout is so long that he can wrap his ENTIRE BODY around the jaws.
This particular crocodile is more like a Sarcosuchus (aka the ancient “super croc”) than any modern crocodilian. Sarcosuchus got up to twice as long as most modern salties, reaching a maximum length of around 39ft. Here’s a Sarcosuchus skull compared to that of a modern crocodilian (and a human) for comparison.
And then there’s this guy standing next to a lifesize replica:
While the film clearly uses the crocodile for the purpose of comic relief, the only reason we are able to view Hook’s interactions with the creature as funny rather than horrifying is because he is labeled as a villain. Pinocchio and Geppetto, for instance, have a similar encounter with Monstro the whale, which is depicted in a way that is much more frightening and disturbing because in this case, the people being chased are our heroes. Let’s be honest…being eaten alive is a terrifying concept, and I think pretty much all of us would react badly to having a gigantic carnivorous animal following us around all the time the way Hook does. It would be like living in the world of “Jaws” or “Jurassic Park”…except the man-eating animal has no particular interest in harming anyone except YOU and instead of ripping you to shreds (which would be bad enough), it will probably just swallow you whole so that you die a slow, painful death by suffocation and/or dissolution by stomach acid. Even if you want to argue using cartoon logic and assume that, like Geppetto inside Monstro, he could somehow survive for awhile, he would eventually probably starve to death if he couldn’t escape. Either way, it’s not a fun way to go.
TL;DR—Hook is living a hellish nightmare of a life and has every reason to react the way he does to the crocodile. Don’t be mean to my boy. He has enough problems as it is.
Okay, rant over.
I finished the book Never Never (The story of Captain Hook) and I needed to draw young James
I went to Hardwick Hall (aka Malfoy Manor) recently and so naturally, I took a thousand photos and came away with an equal amount of headcanons. I know only the exterior was used in the movies but measurements were taken from rooms inside and were used when they built the interior sets. So it was eerily familiar walking in.
This is a place I’ve imagined inside out for decades, to finally have something solid to work with was super exciting. I was at Scorpius levels of geeking out! But seriously though, it’s such a beautiful location and I highly recommend a visit if you’re able to. But you’re not here for travel advice, you’re here for the feels…
Featuring lots of Drastoria, young Scorpius, and teenage Scorbus. Just all the fluff!
Keep reading
Secrets in the Cellar: A true story of the Austrian incest case that shocked the world by John Glatt
My rating: 2 of 5 stars Short book, easy read. Most of it consists more of neighbors saying 'I can't believe it,' rather than talking about the actual crime. It also repeats major (and minor) points several times seemingly for no reason. My version was also missing the "8 pages of shocking photos". Not bad if you know nothing about what happened but if you are looking for something in-depth, continue looking. A disappointment on the whole. View all my reviews
The Executioner's Song by Norman Mailer
My rating: 4 of 5 stars Recommended to me by my Mother, The Executioner's Song was an in depth look at the justice system in America in the 1970s. Gary Gilmore is paroled to Utah from Oregon. He meets a girl and that's when it goes all wrong. Two people are killed and the state of Utah is baying for blood. When he is convicted, Gary Gilmore accepts his fate and demands to be executed for his crimes, making America blanch. With executions still legal in Utah (at this time), it still have been some years since the last person was executed in America, creating all sorts of powerful reactions. To be honest, I was bored for most of the story. It is based upon true events and the way it was presented was, bizarre. For me there seemed way too much backstory for a lot of the minor characters that had very little to do with the overall story. Yet there were times when I found myself backtracking pages trying to figure out when a new character came on the scene and what their story was, only finding no backstory for them. Looking back I wonder if they were people that didn't offer information beyond their involvement with the cases. If you read this book, make a flow chart of all the people names, especially in the second half of the book. I believe there are about 17 lawyers that are mentioned throughout and if you are not paying strict attention, you'll be lost. Also a lay person's knowledge of law is helpful, though that was handled VERY well in the book, explaining the legality and how it differs in Utah. Now, all that said, the book has something like 1100 pages, (not a light weekend read) yet it wasn't until the last 50 pages (and Acknowledgement) that I really go into the story. It was very fascinating watching how so many people that were involved with the main character changed and how they ended up. The events at the end of the book were eye opening to say the least. A front row seat to something I never thought to witness. Yet despite the horror of the events of the book, there was a feeling of respect for everyone. Killers and victims alike. I will say that I have never read any true crime novel that handles both sides of the crime with that level of humanity, acknowledging that while some criminal acts defy logic, everyone is human. Do I think the book is worth it? Yes. I've been complaining to friends that every time I picked the book to read, it grew another 100 pages. I feel if nothing else, it offers the most interesting insight into the legal system of the time, capital punishment, belief and humanity. View all my reviews
On Captain Jas. Hook’s timeline: a trick of narration and metatextuality
To most, Captain Hook is, and always will be, Peter Pan’s greatest foe; but that would be without taking into account James Matthew Barrie’s lifework: fleshing out what remains to be his most thorough character.
Sixteen years after the publication of the 1911 novel of Peter Pan, and twenty-three years after the first apparition of the eponymous character on stage, it was not the boy who couldn’t grow up who was chosen to be the center of Barrie’s speech at Eton; neither was it Wendy Darling - by many accounts the true hero of the story. Instead, Eton’s provost sent the following prompt to the revered author: “James Hook, the pirate captain, was a great Etonian, but not a good one”. It was the author’s role to refute this statement; which he did, and magnificently so. But what we learn from this speech seems contradictory from what had been established from the novel… Unless you study it by taking into account Barrie’s chief characteristic as an author: he is, and is remembered as, a wonderful storyteller.
Barrie’s style in Peter Pan (1911) is remarkable as he constantly steps away from his role as a narrator and reveals his hand in spinning the story as its author. For instance, in chapter 5, the narrator/author placidly remarks:
“Let us now kill a pirate, to show Hook’s method. Skylights will do.”
We switch from description to action as the narrator dictates; and as such, the narrator shows that he is not only narrating, but also choosing how the story goes along. This kind of storytelling is traditionally used orally; here, it feels as though the written text is alive, being spoken as we read. Funnily enough, this kind of narration isn’t confusing for children at all; instead, it reinforces the fictional aspect of it all. The children reading musn’t fear for Peter or Wendy or the Lost Boys; for it remains, after all, a story.
But is Barrie only using metatextual tools to reassure the children? A closer look at the text shows otherwise.
It’s one thing to write the story as though it were told orally; it is another to create doubt in the mind of the reader by slipping in-and-out the diegesis. Often, the author relates the events as though they had been shared with him by someone else; to keep in mind the fifth chapter of the book, we can read:
“I have been told that he [Captain Hook] was a raconteur…”
And this recurrent use of “being told”, “having heard”, etc., suddenly fleshes out this fantastical world, by connecting it to the seemingly actual life of the author. Not only does Barrie tell and shape the story to his will, but he seemingly takes elements from his friends, acquaintances, and other faceless and nameless figures that only serve to give credit to his story.
This fascinating blur between real and the fake has also been manipulated by other great authors to the destination of children: one of the most famous examples might be none other than “Lemony Snicket” of the Unfortunate Events series. And there might have been some inspiration from Barrie when writing the thirteen mystery books; for Barrie often appears as an investigator himself.
Indeed, his 1927 lecture is not only a reply to the prompt given to him a month prior, but an investigation; as Brian Till puts it in his article “The Secret History of Captain Hook”,
“Barrie takes the tone of an investigative reporter or prosecutor-judge, dutifully presenting the facts he has found.”
In his speech, and in order to “prove his case”, Barrie presents not fiction, but facts - heard from acquaintances and friends. Barrie mentions names as one would call witnesses to the bar: Mr. Jasparin, or Hook’s Aunt Emily, provide accounts which have to be taken for granted. It becomes difficult to keep in mind it is all fiction, as James Matthew Barrie remains ambiguous of what his actual role might be: both author, narrator, investigator, and witness.
Allow us, after having presented our facts, to round them up with the actual question at hand: what is Captain Hook’s actual timeline? This question might be asked by whoever read both the novel and Barrie’s lecture. Indeed, if one takes into account the novel, Hook is a contemporary of Stevenson’s Long John Silver (the “Sea-Cook”); thus, an 18th century-pirate. However, if one takes into account the latest additions Barrie made with his Eton speech, Hook is a contemporary of Barrie; thus, a 19th century pirate. It is known that only Peter Pan remains forever young; his Lost Boys grow up and are replaced by others. Therefore, it is out of the question to consider that Hook managed to live for over a hundred years.
So while both descriptions can be considered canon, which is actually real?
The following extract is from Hook’s description in the novel:
“In the midst of them, the blackest and largest in that dark setting, reclined James Hook, or as he wrote himself, Jas. Hook, of whom it is said he was the only man that the Sea-Cook feared. […] In manner, something of the grand seigneur still clung to him, so that he even ripped you up with an air, and I have been told that he was a raconteur of repute. […] A man of indomitable courage, it was said that the only thing he shied at was the sight of his own blood, which was thick and of an unusual colour. In dress he somewhat aped the attire associated with the name of Charles II, having heard it said in some earlier period of his career that he bore a strange resemblance to the ill-fated Stuarts…”
What transpires from this entire description are the many marks of hearsays (which have reached both Barrie’s ears and, more interestingly, Hook’s). “Of whom it is said…”, “I have been told…”, “it was said…”, “having heard it said…”; all these are proofs that none of these descriptions come from first-hand accounts.
These second-hand accounts somehow differ from the accounts given in Barrie’s lecture at Eton in 1927; in the novel, Aunt Emily or Mr. Jasparin are nowhere to be found - which also means there are no “reliable” sources for these comments on Hook’s character. In the novel, these comments remain sourceless - thus, vague and unreliable. While Barrie turns himself into an investigator for his Eton speech, his intention isn’t the same with the Peter Pan novel. The novel is destined for children, and as such, it makes sure the children feel impressed by the main foe of the novel. In order to accomplish that, it creates a villainous (and by extension, mysterious) aura to wrap around Hook’s shoulders: what can be more impressive than the man itself, if not the man’s reputation?
Therefore, while the most plausible, but perhaps not the most satisfying, reply to the question is saying that Barrie hadn’t planned to make a lecture about Hook more than twenty years after his first apparition (which explains the time difference between both descriptions), one can offer an alternative.
Captain James Hook might very well be a 19th century Etonian who happened to stumble into piracy and chose to contribute to his fearsome reputation by encouraging, if not starting himself, rumors about his encounters with fantastical 18th century pirates such as Long-John Silver. After all, isn’t Hook known to be a talented “raconteur” himself? As a storyteller, Hook has the capacity to re-invent himself; we know that even his appearance is fashioned after that of 17th century English King Charles II, blurring the timeline even further. By incarnating the very idea of a timeless pirate, deliberately mixing elements from three different centuries, Hook conceals himself from his own mortality - even if, in the end, it isn’t enough to avoid his fate.
The similarities between James Hook and James Barrie are many, and most certainly not fortuitous; these resemblances might culminate in their capacity to spin a story to their will, as Hook chooses to reshape his own image, while Barrie reshapes Hook. In the end, it is difficult to understand where one begins and where one ends; the only thing that remains certain, is that there is still many a mystery left within the intricate text that a peculiar storyteller left us with.
Here’s more ! You can find the rest at #neverchase