if you aren't putting eyeshadow on that morally grey tenor, i think something is wrong with your production.
Cosimo Galluzzi
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
One Nice Bug Per Day
Keni
KIROKAZE
Today's Document

PR's Tumblrdome

titsay
taylor price
untitled
Stranger Things
Game of Thrones Daily
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸

Origami Around
we're not kids anymore.
trying on a metaphor

Andulka

tannertan36

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
YOU ARE THE REASON
seen from Belgium
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from Germany

seen from Germany

seen from Finland
seen from Germany
seen from New Zealand

seen from United States
seen from Azerbaijan
seen from Ecuador

seen from United Kingdom

seen from Germany

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Netherlands
seen from Germany

seen from United States
seen from United States
@teatraal
if you aren't putting eyeshadow on that morally grey tenor, i think something is wrong with your production.
Where do you watch operas?
There are plenty of complete filmed opera performances available on YouTube, which you can watch for free. Unfortunately, not all of them have English subtitles, but if necessary, you can always find a translation of the libretto online to follow along with.
In fact, just for fun, as an example, I'll provide some links to complete filmed performances of the world's top 10 most popular operas, with English subtitles.
Die Zauberflöte (The Magic Flute)
Studio film, 1971 (Nicolai Gedda, Edith Mathis, William Workman, Christina Deutekom, Hans Sotin; directed by Sir Peter Ustinov; conducted by Horst Stein)
La Traviata
Studio film, 1968 (Anna Moffo, Franco Bonisolli, Gino Bechi; directed by Mario Lanfranchi; conducted by Giuseppe Patané)
Carmen
Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, 2006 (Anna Caterina Antonacci, Jonas Kaufmann, Ildebrando d'Arcangelo, Norah Ansellem; staged by Francesca Zambello; conducted by Antonio Pappano)
La Bohéme
Studio film, 1965 (Mirella Freni, Gianni Raimondi, Rolando Panerai, Adriana Martino; directed by Franco Zeffirelli; conducted by Herbert von Karajan)
Le Nozze di Figaro (The Marriage of Figaro)
Teatro alla Scala, 2006 (Ildebrando d'Arcangelo, Diana Damrau, Marcella Orsatti Talamanca, Pietro Spagnoli, Monica Bacelli; staged by Giorgio Strehler; conducted by Gérard Korsten)
Tosca
Teatro Real de Madrid, 2004 (Daniela Dessí, Fabio Armiliato, Ruggero Raimondi; staged by Nuria Espert; conducted by Maurizio Benini)
Madama Butterfly
Theatrical film, 1995 (Ying Huang, Richard Troxell, Ning Liang, Richard Cowan; directed by Frédéric Mitterand; conducted by James Conlon)
Don Giovanni
Zurich Opera, 2001 (Rodney Gilfry, László Polgár, Isabel Rey, Cecilia Bartoli, Liliana Nikiteanu, Roberto Saccá, Oliver Wimer, Matti Salminen; staged by Jürgen Flimm; conducted by Nikolaus Harnoncourt)
Il Barbiere di Siviglia (The Barber of Seville)
Metropolitan Opera, 2007 (Peter Mattei, Juan Diego Florez, Joyce diDonato, John Del Carlo, John Relyea; staged by Bartlett Sher; conducted by Maurizio Benini)
Act I, Act II
Rigoletto
Studio film, 1982 (Ingvar Wixell, Luciano Pavarotti, Edita Gruberova; directed by Jean-Pierre Ponnelle; conducted by Riccardo Chailly)
This film is about a different machine from the same company, but you can see a Headliner at 2:10:
HOW IS MY SISTER STRAIGHT UP CARRYING A GUZHENG?????
SIS IS FUCKING BUFF
1927 Kodak Petite Cameras. From Art Deco 1920, FB.
Wow, apparently the bellows were also colored to match the housing, and they came with accessories like matching compacts.
found what they look like with the bellows open!!
credit u/deepsky_wonders on reddit
A slightly later Kodak Six-16 Art Deco camera in brown, this model was made between 1932 and 1936. It is a marvel of design and engineering for its era, with a much nicer lens and shutter than the earlier cameras. The textured leather has faded over time; when it was new it was a richer, warmer color that was somewhat closer to the warm brown of the enameled metal parts. Some vestige of the original color is preserved under the flap of the carrying case. I do wish the baseplate/door had the lovely designs of the earlier Art Deco series.
Where's that tweet about how American chants are "let's go [team name] and some other country (Irish?) fans are "I've made up a song about the other team's drinking problem to the tune of London Bridge Is Falling Down one two three"?
there is something lovely about the collectivity of this
there's a common belief that artists know how to make art. this is untrue. i've yet to meet a single artist who has any idea what they're doing
acrylic, canvas 70*70 cm „Moment of Truth“ 2025
traditional chinese firework huohu火壶 by 江寻千
This is beautiful. Is this the same lady that learned the iron fireworks technique too?
I'm posting this here because yes it's visually beautiful, but more importantly it shows the process of learning. It's not easy. It's scary. There's not a lot of people doing it.
It's beautiful because of the effort, not in spite of it. I feel like we don't value the effort of learning in social media posts, and this was incredibly done.
We were doing an activity where the kids got to make a playbill for a musical about themselves and all the other kids were like “character list: mommy, daddy, me, my brother, my best friend” “scenes: I get a puppy, first day of school, my baby sister is born”
But one little girl was like “oh, it’s a musical about ME you say” and the character list was all the other girls in the class cast as her body parts, and a story about how her body works.
“Kaylee is nice so she will be the heart. Lily is my kidneys. Sapphire is the lungs.”
She surreptitiously showed me that the girl who kept taking the crayons she was using was cast specifically as “left buttcheek” and I had to pretend like that wasn’t the funniest thing I’d ever seen.
I would watch the shit out of this
new ebbits! new site!
this is probably my favourite comic of all time jsyk
can someone explain this to me?
Sure thing! For convenience I’ll refer to the guy with his arms in his pockets as SG (shorter guy) and the one on the computer as TG (taller guy).
In the first panel, SG sees TG playing on the computer and is disappointed. SG puts a lot of value in the idea of “making things,” specifically “art,” and thinks TG is just wasting their time
So he asks them if they wouldn’t rather be “making something” instead of just playing games and listening to music, implying that TG isn’t doing anything worthwhile or creative with their time
But TG replies that “interpreting is generative,” meaning that even if they spend their time just doing fun stuff, the mere act of enjoying something is creating an experience and an interpretation. Talking about something, dancing to music or sharing a piece of art with your friends IS “making something,” and each of those can be worthwhile and artistic.
SG leaves, complaining he “can’t be an auteur of [interpretation].” Auteur is a movie term that refers to a filmmaker with artistic control and vision enough to be considered essentially the singular creator of the resulting work of art. Turns out, SG doesn’t just want to “make things,” he wants to make things he and others see as “important.” He wants to make art not for the sake of art, but for the sake of being recognized and praised for his art.
This comic really speaks to elitism within the artistic community, the idea that art needs to meet certain standards to be considered art. SG’s viewpoint is really traditionalist, that art need to be “approved” and validated in order to be considered “really art;” while TG recognizes that art can be as little as just talking about what you love.
TLDR: Art is for everyone, not just some sort of social “artistic elite.”
ooh i love the explanation
Rebloging for that in depth and not even a little snarky explanation. 10/10
It appears that boredom lies behind the most creative ideas. That's why quarantine has produced some of the most entertaining activities. One of them is the Getty Museum challenge, that so many of you have already seen in our previous article here.
I love this an ungodly amount. The creativity. So cool
For anyone wondering; the artworks are, in order:
Tōshūsai Sharaku -- Ōtani Oniji III in the Role of the Servant Edobei (1794)
Pablo Picasso -- Woman In A Hat With Pompons And A Printed Blouse (1962)
Jacques-Louis David -- The Death Of Marat (1793)
Afarin Sajedi -- Like A King (2014)
Rembrandt van Rijn -- Portrait Of A Woman With Gloves (between 1632 and 1642)
Gustav Klimt -- The Three Ages Of Woman (1905)
Edvard Munch -- The Scream (1893)
Baldomero Gili -- La Ricitos (1912)
Joos van Craesbeeck -- The Temptation Of St. Anthony (1650)
Frida Kahlo
Keith Haring -- Untitles (The Dance) (1987)
Leonardo Da Vinci -- Lady With An Ermine (1489-1491)
René Magritte -- The Son Of Man (1964)
Kano Mitsunobu -- Portrait Of Toyotomi Hideyoshi (c. 1598)
Théophile Steinlen -- Le Chat Noir poster (1896)
Jan Asselijn -- The Threatened Swan (c. 1650)
Orazio Gentileschi -- Danaë (1621-1623)
? -- Portrait Of A Lady With A Child (1900s)
Pablo Picasso -- Girl Before A Mirror (1932)
René Magritte -- The Great War (1964)
Rita Dmitrijenko -- A Dance With Death
Grant Wood -- American Gothic (1930)
Andrew Wyeth -- Christina's World (1948)
Johannes Vermeer -- Girl Interrupted At Her Music (1660-1661 or 1658-1659)
Giovanni Strazza -- The Veiled Virgin (1850s)
Frida Kahlo -- Still Life with Parrot and Fruit (1951)
Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio -- Narcissus (1597-1599)
Kees van Dongen -- The Corn Poppy (c. 1919)
Georgia O'keeffe -- Black Mesa Landscape, New Mexico (1930)
I just really appreciated this and wanted to share
Just watched Adam Conover (of Adam Ruins Everything) make such a solid point that I think we should spread far and wide. Yes, having AI write your emails is lazy, sure, but people love being lazy. We need to really emphasize that sending AI emails (or using AI responses on social media, or publishing AI flyers, or or or) is rude.
It's rude. You're making someone take their time to read something you couldn't bother to write. You're telling them they were so unimportant you couldn't be bothered to actually take the time to say something yourself. And frankly, you're lying about it while you're at it.
It's rude.
The above is doubly true if the content of the email is something that will be important to the person receiving - especially something that affects them negatively. They see that this thing that affected them so much didn't matter enough to you to write it yourself. I was a bystander to such a thing not long ago and it was just awful.
RUDE!!! that is so very much it.
If I may offer the lecturer's perspective on this idea:
Currently, it's marking season for us in the UK. I have an exam board in four hours, in fact, which is where we all go over every profile of every student on our courses, see what results they've achieved, and work out their "decision" - if all is well, the decision is to let them continue the course, or the final degree grade calculated if they're in final year. If it hasn't gone well, the decision is about whether they get to rework the pieces that failed, resit exams, repeat the whole year, or be required to withdraw.
And, as has been the case for the last two years, the profiles are now littered with plagiarism investigations. Every one of those - every single one - will have come in as an assignment that the lecturer received, and started reading, and then with a sinking feeling thought "This isn't your work." Every one had to go to an academic misconduct hearing. Every one is an enormous draw on time and resources, including the emotional reserves of the lecturer.
And I know that's not the main issue! I know in the grand scheme of things, our feelings aren't the most important part of this equation! But as we're talking about rudeness, let me explain:
Firstly, the work itself. You begin reading, you see it's AI. Contractually, we have to read it anyway, and give feedback on why it's shit, and what makes it bad, and that is absolutely fucking soul destroying. Most students who use AI are doing so because they've managed to train their brains to find reading something boring abhorrent, and they want to skip that part; but a ChatGPT-generated report is bland, vague, and utterly devoid of any passion, insight or personality. In short, it's boring. You simply passed your boredom on to us.
Secondly, regardless of your personal feelings about the assignment, it at least had a purpose. It was there to stretch you, and make you think about the topic so you could learn about it, and to test that learning so we can all make sure you have actually learned what you need to. But the slop you handed in, that I now have to mark? What's the point? Literally what is the fucking point of me marking it? You didn't even write it. None of the feedback I'm obligated to give means anything to you. I'm marking ChatGPT, and it can't read.
Which means, not only is it fucking boring, it's actively pointless. Ask anyone in the world what a boring but pointless obligatory task does to your mood. Imagine that.
Thirdly, the misconduct hearing. Because listen, again, the lecturer's feelings here are, once again, not the main point. Students who cheat like this aren't doing so because life is hunky dory. They're stressed and overwhelmed and struggling, and they think they've found a magic way out, and so being pulled into a misconduct hearing - where the best they can hope for is to have to redo the whole piece for a capped mark, on top of all the rest of the work they have (functionally, a bonus assignment), and the worst is expulsion - is a mental breakdown-inducing experience. That, obviously, is the biggest issue.
But, the lecturers know all that, which means we know what we're triggering if we do report it. I cannot tell you how upsetting it is to receive a slop assignment, realise what it is, and then have to make the call to report it. I know damn well how upsetting that's going to be for you. I know how stressful and painful that's going to be. I know this might mean you're going to be thrown out of university. In some cases, I know it means you will be.
I know I could look the other way to spare you that
And oh, that gets tempting. When things are really bad for you, and I see you struggling, and this is your third strike; fuck me but it's tempting to pretend that I can't tell.
I cannot do that.
Which brings me to number four: the soul-bleachingly fucking horrible ordeal that is the misconduct hearing itself. Most people are non-confrontational; I'm no exception. I also simply do not enjoy a sobbing, panicking student sitting in front of me, telling me about how stressed and scared they are and how they're terrified they're going to fail. But that's how these things go.
Our most recent example is an international Masters student. I don't know the particulars for him; but I do know it's not uncommon in his part of the world for families to go into obscene debt, often to loan sharks, to send their kids to UK universities. Failure means more than just academia for him. Having to sit through him turning white and quietly begging us to give him another chance before he left in tears he tried to hide from us was, obviously, much worse for him than us; but it was honestly traumatic. Even now, two weeks later, I can't get it out of my head. There's nothing we can do; but, I feel guilty anyway. I could have looked the other way.
(It wouldn't have passed anyway. It was terrible. But at least he'd probably be allowed a resit - we're still waiting on the outcome of this one, but he may well be withdrawn)
To bring this back to the point of the post:
I know my feelings aren't really the ones that matter here. I do know that. But, every time a student chooses to use AI to write an assignment, all that is what happens behind the scenes. My job nosedives into being shit. Whether it's reading the boring slop, having to write pointless feedback, or making the upsetting decisions to report it when I know what the consequences will be and then having to deal with the guilt, my job that I love suddenly becomes shit. And that, actually, among the many other things it is, is fucking rude.
all of this ;-;
Goddess of Depression by Victor Nazarenko
*she's fast
*they're fast