nowhere really

[pukicho]

There is literally nothing more powerful on this planet than taking a 15 minute walk twice every day.

[daysleftofsecondterm]

Hey.

Yeah you- the person reading this. Stop scrolling for a second.

You’re going to be okay. You have to believe that. It might take a long time and who knows how much work, but you’re going to be okay.

You’re going to be okay.

You’re going to be okay.

[currentlycryingaboutlancelot]

the thing about hamlet is that it is sooo epistemological. like how can you truly know what has happened in the past and how to respond to it? how can you know whether there is or isn’t an afterlife? how can you know what justice is? if what you’re doing is just? how can you know the girl who wrote letters to you meant anything she said? how can you know you did? how can you know your friends aren’t plotting against you? do you know it if they promise they’re not? do you really know this ghastly being speaking to you is your father and not an evil spirit? how do you know it’s not your imagination? how do you know it’s your father? did you ever even know who he was when he was alive? how did you know it? how do you know that he loved you?

[gauzemer]

Perhaps the greatest tragedy in Swamp Thing: Twin Branches is that Alec was so ready to be a human that he shredded his report, and that report could have saved his humanity

[brightbeautifulthings]

"Living things can't live without other living things. But the difference between parasitism and symbiosis is communication."

— Maggie Stiefvater, Swamp Thing: Twin Branches

[panthermouthh]

(angriest I’ve ever been in my life) and Brutus is an honourable man

[ladythomasina]

modern-dress production of King Lear where Regan and Goneril use ChatGPT to write their insincere flattering speeches

[dailyclassicart]

Pierre-Auguste Renoir - "Julie Manet with Cat (detail)" (1877)

[389]

[punzieflower]

Fifi and the Flowertots

[weltenwellen]

Rachel Gillig, The Knight and the Moth

[goddessdiary]

[kisxmesoft]

[kaiserin-erzsebet]

Niche history take that annoys me:

"this person doesn't look the same way in pictures as they do in paintings. It must be them paying for the painter to "Photoshop" it to make them look better"

Consider that the painter was a flawed person who maybe captured an imperfect likeness. Maybe there is no malicious intent at all. Maybe there's also softening of lines or colors for reasons of style.

On the other side, also consider that photographs (especially 19th century ones) can be unflattering due to light, staging, new technology, etc. Whereas the painter may adjust things to get a better likeness to the person they are seeing in front of them.

[ether--net]

[fairytale-angel]

[dominoroach-deactivated20231102]

🪨

🪲🌱🪱🐛🐌🌱🌱🪳🦗🪱🪱🌱🪲🐜🐜🐜🪱