I just really wanna appreciate how cool the set for this video is, plus the fact that Mariah and Angela's bg is the same one for the Axe Man song
Mike Driver
No title available
styofa doing anything
tumblr dot com
Peter Solarz
No title available
wallacepolsom

izzy's playlists!
Today's Document

Product Placement
Jules of Nature

if i look back, i am lost
AnasAbdin
Keni

@theartofmadeline
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

No title available

Love Begins

Kaledo Art
dirt enthusiast
seen from Türkiye

seen from Germany
seen from Argentina
seen from Ireland

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from Germany

seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia

seen from Singapore
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Netherlands

seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from Belarus
@thelastmanipulation
I just really wanna appreciate how cool the set for this video is, plus the fact that Mariah and Angela's bg is the same one for the Axe Man song
thinking again about TvTropes and how it’s genuinely such an amazing resource for learning the mechanics of storytelling, honestly more so than a lot of formally taught literature classes
reasons for this:
basically TvTropes breaks down stories mechanically, using a perspective that’s not…ABOUT mechanics. Another way I like to put it, is that it’s an inductive, instead of deductive, approach to analyzing storytelling.
like in a literature or writing class you’re learning the elements that are part of the basic functioning of a story, so, character, plot, setting, et cetera. You’re learning the things that make a story a story, and why. Like, you learn what setting is, what defines it, and work from there to what makes it effective, and the range of ways it can be effective.
here’s the thing, though: everyone has some intuitive understanding of how stories work. if we didn’t, we couldn’t…understand stories.
TvTropes’s approach is bottom-up instead of top-down: instead of trying to exhaustively explore the broad, general elements of story, it identifies very small, specific elements, and explores the absolute shit out of how they fit, what they do, where they go, how they work.
Every TvTropes article is basically, “Here is a piece of a story that is part of many different stories. You have probably seen it before, but if not, here is a list of stories that use it, where it is, and what it’s doing in those stories. Here are some things it does. Here is why it is functionally different than other, similar story pieces. Here is some background on its origins and how audiences respond to it.”
all of this is BRILLIANT for a lot of reasons. one of the major ones is that the site has long lists of media that utilizes any given trope, ranging from classic literature to cartoons to video games to advertisements. the Iliad and Adventure Time ARE different things, but they are MADE OF the same stuff. And being able to study dozens of examples of a trope in action teaches you to see the common thread in what the trope does and why its specific characteristics let it do that
I love TvTropes because a great, renowned work of literature and a shitty, derivative YA novel will appear on the same list, because they’re Made Of The Same Stuff. And breaking down that mental barrier between them is good on its own for developing a mechanical understanding of storytelling.
But also? I think one of the biggest blessings of TvTropes’s commitment to cataloguing examples of tropes regardless of their “merit” or literary value or whatever…is that we get to see the full range of effectiveness or ineffectiveness of storytelling tools. Like, this is how you see what makes one book good and another book crappy. Tropes are Tools, and when you observe how a master craftsman uses a tool vs. a novice, you can break down not only what the tool is most effective for but how it is best used.
In fact? There are trope pages devoted to what happens when storytelling tools just unilaterally fail. e.g. Narm is when creators intend something to be frightening, but audiences find it hilarious instead.
On that note, TvTropes is also great in that its analysis of stories is very grounded in authors, audiences, and culture; it’s not solely focused on in-story elements. A lot of the trope pages are categories for audience responses to tropes, or for real-world occurrences that affected the storytelling, or just the human failings that creep into storytelling and affect it, like Early Installment Weirdness. There are categories for censorship-driven storytelling decisions. There are “lineages” of tropes that show how storytelling has changed over time, and how audience responses change as culture changes. Tropes like Draco in Leather Pants or Narm are catalogued because the audience reaction to a story is as much a part of that story—the story of that story?—as the “canon.”
like, storytelling is inextricable from context. it’s inextricable from how big the writers’ budget was, and how accepting of homophobia the audience was, and what was acceptable to be shown on film at the time. Tropes beget other tropes, one trope is exchanged for another, they are all linked. A Dead Horse Trope becomes an Undead Horse Trope, and sometimes it was a Dead Unicorn Trope all along. What was this work responding to? And all works are responding to something, whether they know it or not
An incomplete list of really useful or interesting reads from TvTropes.
please note that yes many of these are concepts that exist elsewhere and a few are even taught in fiction writing classes but TvTropes just does an amazing job at displaying the range of things that can be done with them
legitimately so much of the terminology I use to talk about storytelling, and even think about it in my own head, i learned about from TvTropes
Willing Suspension of Disbelief
Watsonian vs. Doylist
Trope Tropes, for all the ways tropes are used, deconstructed, subverted, and played with.
The Oldest Ones in the Book, which is basically my favorite thing on the entire Internet
Punk Punk, for -punk subgenres
Sliding Scale of Silliness vs. Seriousness, Sliding Scale of Idealism vs. Cynicism
The Weird Al Effect is a fun one
Chekhov’s Gun, Chekhov’s Boomerang, Chekhov’s Skill, and further variations
Law of Conservation of Detail
Law of Conservation of Normality
Anthropic Principle
Word of God, Death of the Author
Sliding Scale of Fourth Wall Hardness
Mohs Scale of Science Fiction Hardness
Genre Savvy
Flashbacks and Chronology breaks down all the ways you can handle chronology in storytelling
Show, Don’t Tell is a very good breakdown of what is showing, what is telling, and how both can be used effectively.
Lampshade Hanging
Noodle Incident is just fun imo
Genre Title Grab Bag
Fridge Horror
Rule of Cool, and also Cool of Rule
The Smurfette Principle
The Hays Code - not a trope but a very good breakdown of how the Hays Code affected storytelling in film
this is just a really short list of examples I encourage people who write or otherwise create stories to browse around on this site it’s so useful
Feeling some kind of way about a 125-year-old book being adapted so many times, the title character being so ingrained in public consciousness that he’s become a complete joke…
yet when reading the novel, we’re all horrified by Lucy’s mother’s well-intentioned actions. We were on the edge of our seats when Jonathan’s journal entries ended. We cried for Jonathan’s and Mina’s love for each other, the kindness of the Transylvania locals doing what they could to protect Jonathan, the captain who fought to bring his ship to shore when his entire crew disappeared around him, the townsfolk who honored him and wanted to adopt the stray dog found aboard…
I dunno, this hundred year old book that’s been in the public domain forever still draws us into the characters’ lives and makes us love them. I just think that’s neat
The defintion of hell is knowing a show is incredibly well-received in its first season, but if people don’t become machines churning out tweets, content, and rewatching 24/7, there’s no likelihood it’ll get a chance to tell its whole story. This shit is madness. Shows in different genres shouldn’t have to pit-battle for dominance. First seasons are MEANT to be baselines establishing worlds and characters, not complete storylines. The idea that this golden age of television has turned into “get it done in one or get out” is revolting.
TV is supposed to be long form storytelling. We are supposed to take our time getting to know the characters. This whole “oh this season is really an 8hr movie” bullshit needs to go away. Movies are movies and television is televisions. There are pros and cons for each medium, and we need to keep leaning into the strengths of TV which is that we get filler eps and time to get to know characters slowly, over years. That is what makes it magical.
Shortened seasons fighting for their lives and getting axed because they aren’t instantly iconic is not how to develop a new generation of writing talent. This attitude of treating creatives as content creators is so fucking damaging on a fandom and industry level and I HATE it.
I agree with aspects of this but it’s giving ‘just give 3 episodes before it becomes interesting ’ energy as well. Like your first season shouldn’t fall flat just cause it’s building blocks for s2
I’m not saying a first season should only be building blocks; that’s a waste of everyone’s time. I’m saying it’s ridiculous to look at a television show, intended to have a larger scope than a film—especially one adapting a comic series of 30-75 issues—and expect all the answers within the first 8 episodes. Television as a medium is built to last longer than what streaming giants are giving them. Sandman and Paper Girls are both doing stunning work in their first seasons, but they can still only span so much of the overall arc. To expect something massive (and this goes for non-adaptations as well, especially genre work like sci-fi or fantasy) to be completed in 8-12 episodes is unrealistic. That’s the work of a feature film, not series television. If you’re going to pick up the rights to something ambitious, you ought to give them a chance to fulfill their potential, and not make them cage match for months on Twitter for that shot.
#it really just feels more and more like capitalism’s take on TV is ‘what hot new thing can we show off’#and then when the first season is over—even if it has a solid reception—they immediately ask that question all over again#‘what’s the hot new thing’ instead of ‘how do we help this thing we believed in enough to pick up succeed’#stories deserve to be told. and what works over a comic series won’t work the same way without room to run#and again this doesn’t just go for adaptations. people give their hearts and souls to working on projects that are discarded#if they’re not instant megahits#and it’s a huge bummer thinking of how much better shows often get over time. first season could be great and still a show might not hit its#actual stride until season three#this quick-cut cancellation method cuts the head right off those chances#and THEN for it to apply most egregiously to queer and female-led and POC stories is the cherry on the insulting cake#because these kinds of shows already have to fight uphill against the kinds of bigotry we’re seeing in the review bombing#it’s all just a huge bummer to witness. and exhausting. they want us to stop clamoring for diverse content#they want us to get so burned out on losing our shows that we stop tuning in at all#and they keep raising the bar for ‘engagement’ all the while (via @novelconcepts)
I think I know why we still meet here, century after century. It’s not because you want to see whether or not I’m ready to seek death. I don’t think I’ll ever seek death. By now, you know that about me. So, I think you’re here for something else.
And what might that be?
Friendship.
to all the queer kids who have parents who aren’t openly homophobic but still not Nice about their queerness. Its okay to feel mad about it. Just because you’re in a physically safe place doesn’t mean that it can’t be frustrating and heartbreaking to not be accepted. to feel like you have to shove yourself into a box to be loved. your feelings are valid. you deserve all the proud acceptance in the world
renaissance in the 21st century
some more
the WHAT??
okay, found her
some more good replies from the notes
i didnt expect these to hit so hard but then they kept going and going....my god
This was awesome lol.
anne hathaway is so sexy for this
Lion King (1994) explaining the importance of stylized 2D animation: Lion King (2019) and Cats (2019):
Kimba The White Lion (1965) explaining the importance of an original idea:
Lion King (1994) Lion King (2019) Cats (2019)
Shakespeare (1564) explaining the importance of an original idea:
Kimba the White Lion (1965), The Lion King (1994), The Lion King (2019), Cats (2019):
Saxo Grammaticus (c. 1160 – c. 1220) explaining the importance of understanding that all creative work is inherently derivative once you study the oral tradition of storytelling and history and that’s okay because generations have always reformatted tropes and themes to make them relatable to their current audiences
Shakespeare (1564), Kimba the White Lion (1965), The Lion King (1994), The Lion King (2019), Cats (2019):
Tyrannosaurus rex (Late Cretaceous) explaining nothing because he’s a don’t give a fuck
I was high off my ass last night and had this dream where I was in this dense ass forest and sitting there was a tall woman. She was so tall I couldn’t see her face but she was wearing gold and I was like “uh…hi?” And she said “I made you, do you know that?” And I nodded and she was like “I hear your thoughts. Why do you hate my creation? Why do you try to destroy yourself? I made you perfect as you are. Please don’t break my heart”. Then she started crying and it flooded and I woke up with fucking heart palpitations like what does it Mean™️????
polar opposite of this post
inspiration struck and would not let me go until i drew this
This is really beautiful!!!
Ranking the F•R•I•E•N•D•S (as voted by my followers): #3 — Phoebe Buffay ↳ I may play the fool at times, but I’m more than just a pretty blonde girl with an ass that won’t quit.
You ever invite your coworker to watch you give birth just to spite a racist
Okay howmst the fuck has a ship doctor in the far future never handled a birth without the father present? Are sperm donors and gay couples and trans women no longer a thing in the bajillionth century CE?? :/
I while understand the frustration with erasure sometimes it helps to look at things through the cultural context of when something was made. Star Trek the Next Generation was made in 1987, this particular episode I believe aired in 1988 a time when a future where the husband was always present for the birth would have been amazing to many of the people watching the show as men had only been allowed to be present for the birth of their children for 10/15ish years at that point in the US.
Women (and many men) fought for decades with hospitals to even have men allowed in the delivery room during the early stages of labor, which can last for several hours, and hospitals only began to give in to their requests in the 1960s but even then they would be kicked out of the room by hospital staff before the actual birth took place. So many of the couples watching the show would have had to go through labor without having/being allowed to support their spouse regardless of their wishes. Having the child’s father present for the birth only began to happen in the 1970s and 1980s. Which means most people watching this show either went through birth without the support of their spouse, were not allowed to support their spouse during the birth of their child, or their own mother’s went through that during their birth.
A future where the husbands were always present for the birth was still a little crazy to consider in the late 1980s. A good kind of crazy for the people living in that time, it showed a future where the wishes of the couple were finally consistently listened to by medical professionals as a result of the actions of people during their or their parent’s lifetimes. And it does that by also subverting it in allowing Data to step into the role of the father when the father was unknown and/or unwilling/unable to fill that role (I’ll be honest my knowledge of Next Gen is a bit spotty and I have not seen this whole episode, just a piece of it at family Thanksgiving). The woman’s desires as to how she would give birth are listened to and respected, something that still doesn’t happen in many hospitals now and would have been seen as even more revolutionary then. So while it isn’t perfect I think this scene was actually fairly impressive for its time and cultural context and shows a future that many people of that time would have seen as ideal.
I think this kind of contextual understanding and analysis is really important because things that look antiquated now were revolutionary then. I remember reading that the mini skirts in Star Trek TOS were legot just in fashion (about 64’ ish), one of the actresses (the one that played Rand) requested they be in the show and both her and Nichelle Nichols said they didn’t see them as demeaning but liberating in that time and context. Where as NOW it looks like ‘sexy male gaze’ but then it wasn’t.
Miniskirts are comfortable and easy to move in - unlike longer bulkier skirts, which had previously been required for “modesty.” And unlike the approach of “we’ll just put them in pants,” miniskirts made a statement that women crew-members weren’t being treated like men. Miniskirts were a way to say “I can be an attractive woman, wear comfortable clothes, and still look professional and do a serious job.”
The clothing for that message today would be different.
This is also why the bridge crew of TOS may seem “tokenistic” today. When it came out, the Cold War was in full swing and “Soviets” were maligned and hated, Black people could not count on their right to vote being honored, and mixed-race people (like Spock) were called horrible things like “half-breed” and “zebra.” A white man was in charge of the ship, but Gene Roddenberry was fully aware that a chunk of the viewership read him as queer, and did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DISCOURAGE THAT READING, at a time when “homosexual activity” was illegal in the United States!
By today’s standards, “one of everything? How tokenistic.” In 1966? “A Black woman, a Russian, a man from multiple cultures, and a man who loves differently, all top of their fields, all working together and finding common ground to learn, grow, and help where they can? What a wonderful future!”
Also I’m sorry but like. A show also featuring a Japanese man who isn’t a stereotype but part of the crew, having a Scottish character be a part of the central cast (idk if I need to get into why this is important, but considering how England has continuously tried to erase Scottish culture and identity, and the stereotype of Scots as bumbling bumpkins, etc, its kind of nice to see a Scotsman who’s the best of the best at his job).
Moreover, a lot of kids watched this show. MLK himself contacted Nichelle Nichols and asked her to stay on the show when she was considering leaving, because “you don’t have a Black role, you have an equal role,” and there wasnt many Black role models on tv. I can only imagine how Black kids, Asian kids, and mixed race or mixed culture kids felt seeing people like them on tv. Hell, seeing Uhura on screen is what inspired Whoopi Goldberg as a little girl.
Also, yeah, its easy to look back and say ‘damn, fathers weren’t there in the delivery room? What assholes’ but no like they legitimately were not allowed in there.
Tiny correction: while George Takei is Japanese, and while Sulu thus looks like what we in the 20th-21st century consider to be an ethnically Japanese man, Hikaru Sulu was Pan-Asian by design. His last name is not Japanese. And Roddenberry designed him like that intentionally, because while there was a lot of anti-Japanese sentiment in the US at the time (I mean, hell… George Takei himself spent years in Japanese internment camps during WW2), there was also a lot of other anti-Asian sentiments, and Roddenberry intentionally put ALL of it on the character of Sulu.
Like, all the years of anti-Chinese racism in the US? Sulu. Anti-Japanese sentiments left over after WW2? Sulu. Korean War in 1950-52? Sulu. The Vietnam War, with Johnson in 1965 (a year before TOS started airing) choosing to start sending American troops into the conflict? Sulu.
Sulu was Roddenberry’s desperate attempt to show all Asian people as inherently worthy, inherently human, and yeah, he probably put kind of too much on Sulu’s shoulders, but it was the 1960s and Roddenberry fucking cared about representation, so he did what he could.
Just, you know… a little bit more historical Star Trek context
Also to hammer this home?
Scotty was third in line for the captain’s chair. The only non-Kirk who had the con more then him was Spock.
He was smart, he was a *ranked* crewmen, he was a gentleman, he wasn’t a skirt chaser, and he was capitol L loyal. The only time he got into a fight was when someone both went after his Captain, AND his Ship.
And he was Scottish.
That’s so above and beyond the typical Scottish stereotype even TO THIS DAY.
Dr Polaski was coded as something of an arse just so they could make their valid points about equality and bigotry using her as a foil. Yes it was kind of clumsy from a modern perspective, but it was also kind of groundbreaking (not least because you didn’t usually get arses being played by women)
I am hard-coded to put this on any post that mentions MLK and Nichelle Nichols.
Also, it’s very worth noting that the “token minority character” label doesn’t apply in any way to these characters.
Tokens are there to present the appearance of diversity. Whereas Roddenberry created a diverse cast in an era where there wasn’t even a need for the appearance of diversity. Roddenberry didn’t put these characters in because he wanted to look diverse– he put them in to BE DIVERSE.
“Good morning, Paul!”
“Good morning, Rich!”
“How are you this morning?”
“OKAY!”
And Eurydice was a young girl
But she’d seen how the world was
When she fell, she fell in spite of herself
In love with Orpheus
Encanto (2021)
I’ve never seen anything like this on film before. Paul really has nothing at the 30 second mark—but 45 seconds later he’s got the makings of a hit single.
There’s a widespread view that creative people wait for moments of inspiration. But McCartney, at age 26, is literally able to force these moments to happen. What a skill! And note his confidence & absorption. This is what the ‘flow state’ looks like in real time. - Ted Gioia, Author of 11 books including Music: A Subversive History, The History of Jazz, and Delta Blues.