silhouette in the field
Inspired by @callmesamuelxxx 's retell of The Iliad which focus on Hector (+Apollo) and told from POV of The Fates ❤️
h
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

Love Begins
No title available
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

ellievsbear
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda
noise dept.
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸

#extradirty
ojovivo
will byers stan first human second
Jules of Nature
RMH
Misplaced Lens Cap
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
sheepfilms
Keni
YOU ARE THE REASON
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from China

seen from Netherlands
seen from Germany

seen from Iraq

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

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Philippines

seen from United States

seen from Türkiye

seen from Italy

seen from Mexico

seen from United States
@stupidpersonhere
silhouette in the field
Inspired by @callmesamuelxxx 's retell of The Iliad which focus on Hector (+Apollo) and told from POV of The Fates ❤️
https://archiveofourown.org/works/74300151
https://archiveofourown.org/works/74743451
These are the two stories I wrote for Yuletide: "Mothers of the Brazen Spear" - the title being a quote from Euripides' play "The Trojan Women", on which it is based - and "Courting the Chamberlain", which is both fanfiction based on the novel "Sieben Jahre" by Tanja Kinkel and 18th century RPF.
"Mothers of the Brazen Spear": my recipient had asked something Andromache-centric which lets her interact with the women she doesn't interact with in the play, Polyxena and Cassandra. (They all interact with Hecuba, of course, which is why Hecuba doesn't show up in my story.) I added Helen, and tried for something that does the heartrendering tone of the play justice but also offers at least a bit of hope for Andromache.
"Courting the Chamberlain": Caroline Fredersdorf, nee Daum, shows up only in a few intriguing scenes in the novel "Sieben Jahre", but enough to demonstrate that unlike all the other women married to gay men in this book, she actually has a great relationship with her husband - who is Frederick the Great's lover - , and from what I could see in research beyond the novel, this seems to have been the case in real life as well. How the marriage came to be was both fun and challenging to write and is basically my take on a Regency tale in a Frederician context.
Medea Victoris
I have so much affection for Medea as a figure. You gave your everything to someone only to betrayed. The Heavens themselves are on your side and it doesn’t matter in the slightest.
This is a really-really old-old thing, and it’s not even finished (I’m not going to finish it)
It was supposed to include Paris, Troy, and all that
But... Let’s just hate on Theseus, idonno—
OceanGate, the deep-sea exploration company that created the Titan submersible, has removed its Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and LinkedIn a
poor things, well we should definitely make this easier on them by never repeatedly mentioning their name and deeds on the "reblog things forever" website
yea that'd be a shame
by the way, just so everyone knows what not to do, shift+r reblogs a post instantly
just make sure you don't reblog anything about oceangate because that would completely undermine their entire plan 😇😇😇
You also shouldn't queue a post, that would make people keep remembering this post for a longer time, which is the opposite of forgetting
June 18, 2023 never forgor
Link Click is like. what if Orpheus just kept going back again and again and again until his entire existence just became travelling the road back to hades to try one more time to get her because he promised her. and every time she looks in his eyes like it’s the first.
Holy shit in the background, his friend is not just describing the necessity of war or whatever, but the idea that the people they are fighting aren't even a sentient race, so everything is totally fine and justified and man who even cares?
And they aren't even paying attention! They're eating what looks to be a quiche or something very similar and marveling at how delicious it is which tells us how much this is just the background of their day to day lives. It doesn't even register with them! Which is a really interesting way to insert this, as a casual breeze-by so we get an idea of how callous this world can be.
Please do not tell me anything that happens, but also please do not confirm or deny my guesses! Please do not hint! Please do not ask leading questions!
Yo have yall ever heard of unreal engine's Metahuman project?? It's a freely accessible application that's literally the sims character creator on crack. So yeah if you have some OCs you'd like to see rendered and animated in a super realistic way, y'all should check it out because damn it's so cool to see how close I was able to get to how I picture this character IRL.
I have so many chores to do but I cant stop making these
help me I was trying to make book-accurate Peeta and now I want to CRY because he actually looks like a kid now 😭😭😭
gosh, isn't it interesting that this symptom is specific to men for some unknowable reason? listening and learning
why is this symptom specific to men. think
#‘I HAVE BIG FEELINGS’ is only allowed for toddlers#you are an adult. use your words. stop making excuses.#bet these men dont do that around their bosses or anywhere there could be consequences they care about either 💅
lol “have you considered your abusive boyfriend might have ADHD? Try having some empathy once in a while”. Great. Love it.
Seriously, ‘the angry man being aggressive and physically threatening is doing so to express that he is mad’. WOW ya don’t say. ‘But this common abusive behavior is different because he’s special’. Bro they all think the reason they’re abusive is special and not actually abuse or not actually about hurting you or not actually about intimidating you!
Why does he do that? - Lundy Bancroft
Anyone willing to address that this isn't a gendered behaviour? ... no?
Women do this too. Aggression isn't a gender expression. this is not an 'exclusively male' behaviour. You're just sexist. Gender essentialism is a harmful bias; and it obscures real life problems.
My mother slammed a wooden spoon on the counter so hard- it broke in 2- the blowl flew out of the kitchen and broke the glass in the china cabinet. That spoon was a threat to me, specifically, because I 'was on her last nerve'. She was showing me what she wanted to do to me. Because "I was asking for it".
Doors slammed! or pounded on. or locked. objects thrown. my belongings put in the garbage.
stop being sexist about abuse.
are we pretending that women abuse people as much as men do? again? despite extensive evidence to the contrary? okay
anyway, if you read this:
and interpreted it as a sincere statement of my personal beliefs, you have the reading comprehension skills of a stale pop-tart
well. i guess. thanks for proving my point for me?
Bullying and on-line abuse is certainly not a gendered behaviour either!
Gender essentialism is a harmful bias; and it obscures real life problems, and impacts reporting and data collection.
talking about men's behavior as a constructed social class is not "gender essentialism," but thanks for making it clear that all you do is regurgitate wording from other people's tumblr posts and imagine you've burbled out a very compelling opinion
incidentally, telling you that you're wrong is not "bullying." hope this helps, you whiny fucking infant
I reblogged this last year and then immediately bought some of this tea and it was the best decision. It is *SO AWESOME* to have a pitcher of Thai tea ready to go in your fridge.
first 5 faceless emojis are how your summers gonna go
Magnus Archives fan I see
THIS IS SO FUNNY I'M SORRY
🦜🥅💐✨㊗️what does that even mean??!!!!
My good man was flabbergasted
This is still the best introduction to an anime hand down
Snail crossing
English added by me :)
This is the literary criticism hill I have chosen to die on.
There has been a half-complete version of post on my Dreamwidth journal under a “Private” filter (my eyes only) here since 9 December, 2018, just waiting for me to get the energy and mental focus to write an essay outlining all the textual evidence in Act 4, scene 1 (Ophelia’s “madness” scene). But at this point, I don’t think the required energy for that will ever come – at least, not for the long essay format. So I’m just going to post my conspiracy theory Thesis Statement here:
Ophelia did not commit suicide – she was murdered. By Queen Gertrude (probably).
And I can’t help but wonder how this play would be taught and performed if this interpretation were the standard one Here’s a bit of a presentation by Shakespearean actor and scholar, Ben Crystal, on his interpretation of the “To be, or not to be?” soliloquy, and how he no longer thinks Hamlet was suicidal at that point in the play, either (though he was, earlier on): Ben Crystal talks about Original Pronunciation, 20 July 2017 (it’s at a point about 40 minutes in to the whole thing). So what if suicide is not a recurring theme of the play? How does that change things?
Reblogging myself already, because my brain won’t let go of it.
Just imagine how classroom discussions, and essays in literary academic journals would go if it were read that Ophelia did not break under the weight of a cruel world, but instead had to be eliminated because she knew too much, and was on the brink of inciting a rebellion against King Claudius (Yes, that’s actually alluded to in the text).
If, while the men of the play were scheming and faffing about, the play pivoted on the actions of a middle-aged woman on one side, and a teenage girl on the other.
Tell us more! Tell us more!
First off – my mistake: it’s Act 4 Scene 5, not scene one. And it opens thusly (lines that merit attention are bolded):
QUEEN GERTRUDE: I will not speak with her. Gentleman: She is importunate, indeed distract: Her mood will needs be pitied. QUEEN GERTRUDE: What would she have? Gentleman: She speaks much of her father; says she hears There’s tricks i’ the world; and hems, and beats her heart; Spurns enviously at straws; speaks things in doubt, That carry but half sense: her speech is nothing, Yet the unshaped use of it doth move The hearers to collection; they aim at it, And botch the words up fit to their own thoughts; Which, as her winks, and nods, and gestures yield them, Indeed would make one think there might be thought, Though nothing sure, yet much unhappily.
A bit later, Ophelia comes in, singing. Not of flowers, yet, but alternating between a mourning song, and a very bawdy song that a young noble lady of sixteen years should not be singing in public, just in time for Claudius to hear her.
KING CLAUDIUS: Conceit upon her father.
OPHELIA: Pray you, let’s have no words of this; but when they ask you what it means, say you this: [translation: You want to know what it means? I’ll tell you what it means!]
Sings To-morrow is Saint Valentine’s day, All in the morning betime, And I a maid at your window, To be your Valentine. Then up he rose, and donn’d his clothes, And dupp’d the chamber-door; Let in the maid, that out a maid Never departed more. KING CLAUDIUS: Pretty Ophelia! OPHELIA: Indeed, la, without an oath, I’ll make an end on’t: [Let me finish!] Sings By Gis and by Saint Charity, Alack, and fie for shame! Young men will do’t, if they come to’t; By cock, they are to blame. Quoth she, before you tumbled me, You promised me to wed. So would I ha’ done, by yonder sun, An thou hadst not come to my bed.
[So here’s a song about a woman having sex out of wedlock because a guy promised to repay her… and then he reneges on his promise because she had sex with him]
And then Ophelia exits, spouting seeming madness, and Claudius says to Horatio:
Follow her close; give her good watch, I pray you.
So Claudius suspects something – whether that’s a suicide watch, or to make sure she doesn’t inspire rebellion – isn’t explicitly stated in text. But in any case, Ophelia’s not alone.
Then, Leartes comes in, leading a mob of commoners, who are chanting that he should be king (see the comment of Gentleman, above). And we have this exchange:
Leartes: Where is my father?
Claudius: Dead.
Gertrude: But not by him.
That, right there, is a single line of iambic pentameter. Which means that Gertrude literally does not skip a beat to defend Claudius before thinking of protecting her own son.
And now Ophelia comes in and sings her “mad flower song.” This Wordpress article outlines the symbolism of each flower and herb (It also spells out specific actions by Ophelia which are not spelled out in the original). The meaning flies right over our heads, but audiences of the time would have grokked it immediately; There’s “Grief” and “remembrance;” there’s also “flattery” and “deceived lovers” and an herb commonly used to induce abortions…
And the next news we hear of Ophelia is that she’s “Drowned herself.” Who delivers this news? Queen Gertrude – with an overabundance of minute detail of the scene as it happened.
Finally, there’s the fact that Ophelia was being hastily buried in the churchyard – even though that was strictly forbidden for suicides. The younger gravedigger thinks that’s because Ophelia was a privileged noblewoman, and getting special treatment. The older gravedigger reminds him (and the audience) that not all people who die by drowning are at fault…
And then I realized that Hamlet had to have the murder plot revealed to him by the ghost of his father, because he was away at school, but Ophelia was there at court, the whole time, and could have seen everything going down. But who pays attention to teenage girls hanging around the edges, or worries about what they see or don’t see, amirite?
I do think Ophelia was having a mental breakdown, triggered by grief and shock. But I think it was more of the “loss of situational awareness” and “blind to the danger” variety, instead of “no longer have the will to live” variety.
And that’s my analysis. And I’m sticking with it.
Oh, this is splendid!
*bows*
Thank you.
And then there are these lines from Queen Gertrude, after she agrees to talk with Ophelia, and Horatio exits to go fetch her:
To my sick soul, as sin’s true nature is, Each toy seems prologue to some great amiss: So full of artless jealousy is guilt, It spills itself in fearing to be spilt.
I’ve always liked that line about spilling something because you’re trying too hard not to (because RELATABLE). But I only just now realized that Shakespeare was putting underlines and circles and arrows around the whole issue of the queen’s quilt (and active role in the whole scheme with Claudius), by making those lines a pair of rhyming couplets, when nothing else in that scene rhymes.
I think the common interpretation of Ophelia has been handed down to us by literary critics and theater directors, who have all been men, and idealized the manic pixie dream gilrl, so they’ve always cast Ophelia as the tragic and doomed version of that.
When really, she was the brightest candle in the chandelier – and had she lived, she might have led the revolution to put her brother on the throne – so she had to be snuffed out.
Okay – I’d like to post a CORRECTION to this paragraph, that I wrote, above:
Finally, there’s the fact that Ophelia was being hastily buried in the churchyard – even though that was strictly forbidden for suicides. The younger gravedigger thinks that’s because Ophelia was a privileged noblewoman, and getting special treatment. The older gravedigger reminds him (and the audience) that not all people who die by drowning are at fault…
I went back and reread that bit (which really should be included in the list of evidence that Hamlet is a black comedy – in the script, the two gravediggers are named “First Clown” and “Second Clown.”
Anyway, it’s the elder gravedigger who argues that Ophelia committed suicide, but in the process, reminds the audience that it shouldn’t be counted as such. I’ll just quote that bit:
Give me leave. Here lies the water; good: here stands the man; good; if the man go to this water, and drown himself, it is, will he, nill he, he goes,–mark you that; but if the water come to him and drown him, he drowns not himself: argal, he that is not guilty of his own death shortens not his own life.
So, he’s arguing that because Ophelia went into the water, she must have committed suicide – but we, in the audience, who’ve just witnessed Ophelia’s madness just a few scenes earlier (even ignoring Queen Gertrude’s suspicious behavior), know that Ophelia did not “Wittingly” go into the water, because she was (at the very least) so lost in madness that she fell in accidentally.
Now, I’m not one of those people who stan Shakespeare in everything he wrote (a few of his plays are just hot messes), but here, I do agree that he’s at his peak, with what characters know which, (or should that be which know what?), and telling us the story of what happened, not through some Authorial voice on High, but many different limited points of view.
Reblogging to add a link to this post from @bisexual-evanhansen about re-imagining the “Get thee to a nunnery!” scene wherein Ophelia plays an active role in directing the “stage fight” between herself and Hamlet, and it’s played for laughs.
Because I really think it adds to my pile of evidence that Ophelia was murdered.
That warm, fuzzy feeling when a mutual reblogs a post that you were debating about whether to reblog, yourself.
(Instead, I opted to post something new, to put fresh thoughts in my brain)
But this still deserves to be signal boosted. ‘Cause Ophelia was done dirty. First, in-story, by Gertrude, and then, in the centuries after, when Literature teachers and theater directors shape how her story is interpreted.
As someone who first suggested Hamlet is not a tragedy in my tenth-grade English class (I didn’t know the phrase “black comedy” at the time but yeah, it totally is), I would agree with all this, and IN ADDITION:
I would suggest Ophelia’s murder didn’t start with the drowning, and that it wasn’t even entirely related to Laertes.
So first, we have her song about sex out of wedlock. It’s worth noting that much earlier in the play, when she and Laertes speak right before the “to thine own self be true” speech, there are hints that she herself is already “a maid no more,” at Hamlet’s hand. Now keep in mind the rest of the play takes place over the course of, at a minimum, several months, and:
If that’s true, and if perhaps Ophelia has a Little Problem, that little problem–legitimate or not–is heir to the throne.
So if it gets out that Claudius might have been responsible for the death of Hamlet, Sr–and Hamlet, Jr gives us plenty of reasons to be suspicious even before the ghost appears–then he’s almost certainly going to die at the hands of a mob. In which case Hamlet would ascend to the throne, but–oh, what’s this? Hamlet’s dead? Well, then the next in line is–
–a commoner’s child.
Yikes.
So Gertrude offers Ophelia some help with her Little Problem. All of the plants mentioned in the “mad flower song” could be used, in conjunction with each other, as abortifacients, but there’s one very important thing to note about them:
They have to be very, very precisely measured. Or they can cause sudden severe mood swings, hemorrhaging, excessive bleeding, disorientation, lack of focus, muscle weakness, difficulty breathing, unconsciousness, and death.
You know. As might be implied by “singing small snatches of songs” and laying in a creek apparently unaware you’re doing so and unable to pull yourself out. And, as noted above, Gertrude knows one hell of a lot about this scene; as my high school English teacher pointed out, why didn’t anyone help Ophelia, if they could see her so damn well they could describe the whole thing?
Tag commentary from @thoughtsfromtheuniverse (edited for clarity):
#Personally, I’d be more willing to bet on Claudius poisoning her with Gertude’s help. Once you’ve poisoned the king, one peasant girl isn’t much of a stretch. I also think the play works without Ophelia being pregnant; a Lot of plants can be used as abortifacients, and the other flower symbolism is too pointed to be accidental. She could have been poisoned for being too close to Hamlet without a specific fear of an heir […] #Also, i have long held that either Gertrude pushed Ophelia in the stream for insulting her or faked Ophelia’s death to get her the hell out. #Depends on how I’m feeling on the day to day. but that speech is far too detailed for Gertrude not to be involved somehow.
First off, I want to clear something up: Ophelia was no “commoner” or “peasant girl,” but a highborn (albeit young) noblewoman, with free reign to wander the royal palace as she pleased.
That’s part of the younger gravedigger’s argument as to why she (who supposedly committed suicide) was allowed to be buried in the churchyard; both gravediggers assume this is a case of unfair class privilege that gives the noble classes a free ticket to Heaven when a commoner would be sent to Hell without a second thought.
Anyway, back to the “Flower Speech”: When I was first rereading that scene after my “Oh, holy Crap!” moment, I thought Ophelia’s inclusion of abortifacients in her ‘bouquet’ was as a warning to Gertrude.
The very opening lines of the scene are an unnamed Gentleman warning Gertrude that it’s Ophelia who is encouraging the common people to fight for her brother (Leartes) to usurp Claudius, and take the throne.
If Leartes succeeds in his rebellion (as Ophelia probably assumes he will [judging by what I was like as a 17-19 year old]), and she gives birth out of wedlock, well, the new king has a bastard for a nephew. Nothing to boast about. But nothing to kill for, either; Gertrude and Claudius may be nervous about any baby Ophelia may be carrying, but from Ophelia’s P.O.V., she has little motivation to seek help with an abortion.
But if Gertrude gives birth a little too soon after her wedding, that would be proof that she and Claudius were having sex before the murder in the garden, and thus, provide evidence that she had a hand in it.
Getting rid of Ophelia, while framing her death as “suicide by madness” does two things: It silences a provocateur to the rebellion, and also taints its legitimacy, if the most popular voice of the revolution among the common people turned out to be “Not quite Right in the Head (and a blasphemer, too boot).”
Gertrude dying by the poisoned wine meant for Hamlet is more Karmic Justice than a tragic accidental death (that spurs Claudius to suicide).
So yeah: I think Gertrude pushed Ophelia into the river. If I were staging this play, when she comes in to say that the noble lady has drowned, I’d have the cuffs of her sleeves wet and muddy, and maybe some of the lace trim on her bodice to be torn and loose.
You can absolutely argue that Gertrude killed Ophelia if you want to. People love to talk about Gertrude’s incredibly (suspiciously) detailed description of Ophelia’s death. Which goes into a lot of detail about how Ophelia absolutely did not die immediately. According to Gertrude’s testimony.
Ophelia was picking flowers for a flower crown (Gertrude lists the flowers, and additionally doesn’t mention the “grosser name” that shepherds give the long purples/dead man’s fingers. She’s almost certainly eliding a name that evokes dicks, which could absolutely support some of the ‘linking Ophelia and/or Gertrude to illicit sex’ reads.)
Ophelia falls in the river.
Ophelia floats in the river “mermaid like” for a while, long enough to sing “snatches of old tunes.”
Ophelia’s clothes become muddy and waterlogged, and drag her beneath the water until she drowns.
So okay. If Gertrude was there, at the VERY least, she could have probably saved Ophelia, and didn’t.
it’s always a think piece about “why aren’t young people drinking” “why aren’t young people traveling” “why aren’t young people buying houses” “why aren’t young people optimistic for the future” w these elaborate hypothetical reasons
meanwhile the actual answer never changes: we broke, babes (and we live in a capitalistic corporate hellscape sucking the life out of us and the planet)
pink in the night
If there is a time I don’t reblog this it will be because the apocalypse got me
also the creator confirmed the brunette girl is trans!!
Gotta tell you guys something wild in the Chinese fan sphere
So some fanartist drew a “sexy” (read: booby) version of a (cartoon) character who is traditionally very non-sexualised. Fans of the character got mad about it because it’s kind of groundbreaking how that character is written and portrayed and this art totally ignores the entire point of the character. They demanded the art be deleted. In response to that other people said, well what the fanartist did may be distateful but they have every right to draw what they’re into. The two sides fight for days and each starts a harassment campaign and even report their “opponents’” accounts.
So far so typical. But things eventually come to a head and they decide that this will be settled by votes - not through a poll. Through donations to a children’s education charity via each side’s portal. Whoever can get the highest amount of donation wins.
And that is how this charity received over 1 million in donations in three days lol. Oh btw the “freedom of expression” side won by a landslide (960k to 40k)
From now on this is how all petty fandom disputes should be settled.