Oh my god kalyn
i know exactly what this is in response to but the fact of the matter is that this could also apply to SO MANY things
seen from United States
seen from Brazil

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Germany
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from Denmark
seen from Canada

seen from United States
seen from Yemen
seen from Indonesia

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

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
Oh my god kalyn
i know exactly what this is in response to but the fact of the matter is that this could also apply to SO MANY things
Me: "Casually dating." Me too.
Denise: Who are you casually dating?
Me: Michael Fassbender.
Denise: Name one casual date that you have been on.
Me: All of my dates with Michael Fassbender have been casual.
So, I'm reading The Army Correspondence and I've noticed that every time (maybe not every time, but I can't recall any instances otherwise) John refers to his kid, he says "your granddaughter". Was this just a common thing to do then, or do you think it was an attempt to distance himself from her? I don't know much about 18th century linguistics but it seems odd to me.
I actually haven’t noticed that before, but it is very interesting that you did. Frances Eleanor Laurens was John’s only child and the first grandchild for Henry Laurens, so John could have used both the terms “my daughter/child” and “your granddaughter/grandchild” to describe Frances without any sort of ambiguity. I don’t know much about 18th century linguistics either, but it does seem that John intentionally avoided calling Frances his daughter. Even when he first wrote to his father about his marriage to Martha Manning and their baby on the way, he wrote, “my Wife Mr Manning’s youngest Daughter promises soon to give you a Grand Child_” I also can’t think of any instance where John refers to himself as a father. This does come across as an attempt to emotionally distance himself from his wife and child.
Re: your url superpower being head butting and having a gun -- does this make you Meyer?
.......................................shit
shit shit I THINK THAT IS A PRETTY GOOD SUMMARY OF MEYER’S POWERS AS WELL
you realize now that I also crave fanart of meyer as a goat, headbutting people to death WHICH IS NOT A THING I REALIZED I NEEDED until right this very moment
oswaldears replied to your post “so I’m kind of dozing for a few hours after the train ride back home,...”
EVIL NEVER DIES
OF ALL THE COMMENTARY MY BRAIN CHOOSES TO HAVE ON VITO, IT’S THAT
oswaldears replied to your post:staying up late the night before an event sewing...
Welcome to hell.
i thought you were the goddess of cosplay? are you hades, as well?
oswaldears replied to your post: columbiaskies asked:I was not awa...
Wait what is the context of this ask I need to know
This all started when a picture of the Claridge came across my dash annnnnd I basically started screaming, because I'd never actually seen it before it has since been torn down and suddenly everything became very real
So Charlie and Meyer leased a hotel suite together in the Claridge starting in 1924. Off the top of my head, I don't know how long they kept it, buuut it was several years and they kept it at least into the 30s sometime. That's a pretty solid number of years having this hotel suite together.
And they did have a lot of locations that they leased, for business things, as well as their own residences, which were by and large hotel suites. But like. They leased it together and already the mind wanders.
But what gets me WHAT GETS ME IN MY SOOOUUUUL is that The Last Testament describes the Claridge as being for "very private matters." Which. That's a very... loaded phrase. And the mind does wander.
Yeeeeaaaah, about how Charlie is said to have felt about Meyer according to tlt... Like I feel like even IF that book is a real account, IF, then like half the Meyer stuff is author bias anyway? Like it just feels to me like whatshisface didn't like Meyer because of the whole movie deal thing, and maybe Charlie was slightly annoyed at him one day and made a comment, and the author ran with it. Whenever Charlie mentions Vito throughout the WHOLE book he's like "screw that guy" but even when he
(cont) supposedly is hating Meyer, he is still using pet names for him. Isn't one of the "adding machine~*~ ♥︎♥︎♥︎~*~" comments in a sentence about omg h8ing him or something?
[cw discussion of antisemitic comments] YEAH LIKE that's my main issue with it, Charlie's consistent about hating Vito through the whole book but it's only in the last third or so that he suddenly takes a turn towards "fuck Meyer and not in the fun way" territory [and he does the same thing re: Joe Adonis but I don't care about Joey A so whatever], and what REALLY stands out about it is it's ALL framed as "he turned out to be a cheap Jew just like the rest of them," which, fucking what, you have an entire book talking about how close you were to your Jewish associates and then suddenly right there at the end you turn all the way around on the guy who fucking got you out of prison and rely on an antisemitic stereotype you actively argued against to do it? I don't buy it. Like, yeah, the final "adding machine" crack is in a sentence like "I started to get suspicious about how little money was coming in from the States and I realized that out of all of us the one who loved money the most all along was the walking adding machine managing my dough."
LIKE
WHAT
I also really have my doubts about Meyer being the one to say anything about the movie. First off, the guy who delivered the message, Pat Eboli or whatever, worked for Vito. Like he was Vito's personal bodyguard for years. The FUCK is Meyer gonna talk to an underling of Vito's for to run messages for him, when he could just talk to Charlie one on one if he really had to? And the fuck is Charlie going to say ANYONE that closely associated with Vito is trustworthy? I do not buy it. Secondly, I really don't think a fictionalized movie based on Charlie's life would really worry Meyer that much, not when the government was already gunning for him on his casino earnings, which Charlie had nothing to do with anyway. So. Yeah. I honestly doubt a lot of the later stuff in TLT, just because of how blatant the tonal shift is, and I do really want to hear what Vizzini has to say on everything. Especially since the "three months in NYC, three months in Miami" comment is sourced to Vizzini; the only person in Miami of any note at that point was Meyer, and I can't synthesize "wanting to be in the same relatively small city as Meyer for the last three months of his life"!Charlie with "fuck Meyer he's a backstabbing cheapskate stealing my money"!Charlie.