Today's Document
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
tumblr dot com
ojovivo
occasionally subtle
$LAYYYTER
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
oozey mess
No title available
almost home
Origami Around
Sade Olutola
todays bird
PR's Tumblrdome
祝日 / Permanent Vacation
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda
No title available
Janaina Medeiros
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Belarus
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from T1
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia
@waywillow
#inktober with Vera! I almost got scared and had to ask friends for a push on the black clouds. I’m so glad I did! #7thsea #inktober2018 #rpg https://www.instagram.com/p/BozkaOhBBL_/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=1b93ud8ascn70
Ruprecht von Kaufmann, Paintings.
Brilliant, dream-like paintings by German artist Ruprecht von Kaufmann.
Don’t miss Supersonic Art on Instagram!
“Air bubbles” by Woshibai
( https://www.instagram.com/woshibaii/)
Clocking back in to a MBMBAM episode after pausing it for a while is always a trip because there are a few incomprehensible seconds where your brain scrambles to remember what the fuck the context is to sentences like “I reach through the horse and send a message to my dog”
finding love on a hentai company’s chat site
I see a lot of writing advice, particularly about giving characters flaws. The main advice is “everyone has flaws! make sure to give your character flaws or else it’s not realistic!” And after thinking about it… I would like to challenge this.
It essentially posits a view of human nature that there are good and bad traits, and that these traits can be neatly diagrammed into separate columns, one set of which can and should be eliminated. It tends to go along with a view that posits character development should be about scrubbing away of “flawed” traits until the character achieves more a higher level of goodness, or else the character doesn’t and falls into tragedy. This is not untrue, necessarily. There are definitely some “flaws” that are 100% bad and sometimes a good arc is about slowly losing them. However, I could call this advice incomplete.
Consider thinking about it this way. Characters have traits and often whether or not that trait is a flaw is purely circumstantial.
For instance, fairy tales I read as a child. In some, when an old beggar asked for money on the road, it was a secret test of character. The prince who gave the old man money or food would be rewarded. But in other folktales I read, the old beggar would be malevolent, and any prince who stooped to help him would be beaten, punished for letting his guard down. Now, in a story as well as in real life, either of these scenarios can occur–a stranger who asks for help can be benevolent or malevolent. So which is the flaw? Is it a “flaw” to be compassionate? or is it a “flaw” to be guarded?
Trick question–it’s purely conditional. Both traits are simultaneously a strength and a weakness. Either has an advantage, but either comes with a price as well. And whether the price is greater than the advantage depends on circumstance. The same can be said for most character traits, in fact!
An agreeable character who gets along with everyone will be pressured into agreeing with something atrocious because it’s a commonly held viewpoint. A character who’s principled and holds firm even under great pressure will take much, much longer to change their mind when they are actually in the wrong. A character who loves animals and loves to shower them with affection will get bitten if they try the same on every animal. As the circumstances change, flaws become strengths, and strengths become weaknesses. And even a trait that’s wholly virtuous, such as compassion, comes with a price and can be turned for the worst.
You don’t have to think about inserting flaws into your character. Your character, even the most perfect “Mary Sue,” is already flawed the moment you give her any traits at all. The problem with Mary Sue isn’t a lack of flaws, it’s a lack of circumstances to challenge her properly, to show her paying the natural price. Your job as an author is to create circumstances in the narrative that 1) justify why these traits exist in your character 2) show what your character gains from these traits and then 3) change the circumstances to challenge her.
Make your character pay the price for their traits, for their choices. And then, when challenged, you can make a hell of a story by showing us how they adapt, or why they stick to their guns anyway.
G. Willow Wilson on authoritarianism and what it feels like to live in a dictatorship
The nineteenth-century bourgeoisie used morality to assert class dominance — something elites still do today.
Today’s upper middle class maintains the fiction of a meritocratic society, just as the Victorians did. This story allows them to shore up their economic position behind the backs of workers, who are taught that their health problems and dismal career prospects represent individual faults, not systemic dysfunction.
Of course, exercising, eating organic food, and pushing children to use their spare time usefully are not inherently bad things. However, they become markers of bourgeois values when they are marshaled to assert one class’s moral superiority over another and to justify social inequality. It was just as obnoxious in the nineteenth century as it is today.
We should care about health, food, and education. But instead of seeing them as ways to prop up class dominance, we should improve them for everyone. Imagine if all of the energy used to get mediocre, upper-class children into prestigious colleges was redirected into making higher education more accessible and affordable across the board. Imagine if access to healthy food for all was prioritized over attaining status through buying the most virtuous products. Imagine, in short, what our world would look like if socialist values — not Victorian ones — dominated.
This is SUCH a good read, you guys.
No shit, I was in a Political Philosophy class my last year of college, and we were discussing this exact thing. My professor (who was a piece of work in and of herself, tbh) says something to the effect of, “This class divide is held up by the cultural idea that rich people are inherently more moral than poor people” And this fucking polo-wearing shit sitting next to me mutters under his breath, “But they are, though” and keeps on taking his fucking notes. Like what the fuck??? But yeah. Apparently this is a real thing that people think.
I keep sayin this It’s an attitude we’ve had in the US from the start, and it’s extra super virulent right now.
The Night Time
2014
“Your Black Friend" animated short film by Ben Passmore, Alex Krokus & Krystal Downs
truly accurate.
I love this
dm: roll athletics
all the squishies, in chorus: c a n i r o l l a c r o b a t i c s i n s t e a d
DM: roll acrobatics
my tank, who has not a graceful bone in her thick beefy body: c a n i r o l l a t h l e t i c s i n s t e a d
pretty sure rian johnson timed this scene to match up perfectly to abba
I’m on a kick with this style lately. It’s just a lot of fun and relaxing.
Writing Deaf Characters | Speech is Speech
Before I get going, I’m 75% deaf, as some of you know, semi-reliant on hearing aids and lip reading. My first languages were Makaton sign and then BSL. I now use spoken English.
There are a lot of issues I find with how deaf people are represented in books, when represented at all. I would love to see more deaf and hard of hearing characters in the books I read- without having to read books specifically about deaf/HoH people- but when I find them, they’re grossly undercharacterized or stereotyped. Authors write them in a way that sets signing language characters apart from speaking characters as if they are inferior, and this makes my blood boil.
Some technicalties
I’ll keep this brief.
You may have heard that “deaf” is a slur and you should use “hearing impaired”. Don’t. I’ve never met a deaf or hard of hearing person who believed that. Use deaf for people who are deaf, and Hard of Hearing (HoH) for people who lack hearing. These can be interchangeable depending on the person. This is why sensitivity readers are a useful part of the beta process.
Sign language is incredibly varied. It developes in the same way as spoken language. Fun fact: in BSL there are at least half a dozen ways to say bullshit, my favourite of which is laying your arms across one another with one hand making a bull’s head sign and the other hand going flat, like a cowpat. It’s beautifully crude, and the face makes the exclamation mark. Wonderful.
There are different sign languages. Knowing more than one would make a character multi or bi-lingual, even if they are non-speaking.
Makaton is basic sign language used by children, and it mirrors the very simple language used by toddlers.
Yes, we swear and talk shit about people around us in sign language sometimes, and no, it isn’t disrespectful to have signing characters do this. Just remember that we also say nice things, and random things, and talk about fandoms and TV shows and what we’re having for dinner, too.
Each signed language is different from another. ASL and BSL? Nothing alike. Just google the two different signs for horse.
Remember that sign language is a language, equal to the spoken word
Therefore, treat it as such. Use quotation speech marks and dialogue tags. You only need to explicitly state that this character uses signed language once, and then let your modifiers and description do the rest. It isn’t a form of “sub-speech" or “making hand actions”- sign language is a language all on its own: it has its own grammar rules, syntactical structures, punctuation, patterns, idioms and colloquialisms. For example, “what is your name?” becomes “Your name what?” with the facial expression forming punctuation in the same way that spoken English uses alterations of prosodic tone (inflections). There is even pidgin sign; a language phenomenon usually associated with spoken language.
In the same way that you would describe a spoken-English character’s tone of voice, you would describe a signed-English speaker’s facial expressions and the way that they sign- keeping in mind that these things are our language’s equivalent of verbal inflection.
So please, none of that use of “special speech marks” or italicised speech for sign. If your viewpoint character doesn’t understand signed speech, then you take the same approach that would be used for any other language they don’t understand, like French or Thai. E.g “He said something in rapid sign language, face wrinkling in obvious disgust.” is a good way of conveying this. The proof that you’ve done this well is in whether or not you can switch “sign language” for French or something else, and it would read the same.
Don’t be afraid to describe how things are said, either. Sign language is such a beautiful and expressive way of talking, and to see a writer do it justice would be truly fabulous. Putting this into practise:
“Oh, I love maths!” She said, fingers sharp and wide with sarcasm. She raised her eyebrows.
“I’m sorry.” He replied and made his face small, but could not keep the grin forming. She was starting to laugh, too.
This is part one of two, for the sake of readability and keeping the information simple as I can. Part two- writing the deaf characters themselves- is coming up over the weekend. See you then and best luck with your writing until that point :D
This is part of my weekly advice theme. Each week I look at what you’ve asked me to help with, and write a post or series of posts for it. Next week: settings and character development (including heroes, anti-heroes, villains, and every other kind of character).
Thank you, this is wonderful and helpful.
Some great thoughts on writing deaf characters talking!
this problem isn’t that men “misread” signals (and even verbal statements), it’s that men are unwilling to accept what’s being communicated, because it’d mean they won’t get what they want–and they value getting what they want more than they value their partner’s comfort, safety, and desires. this is a matter of will and values masquerading as a matter of knowledge and communication. men’s “confusion” is their justification for continuing with what they want to do (and society will accept it too!), so there’s always a motivation to be “confused.” that’s the problem.
Kedi (2016)
Source: bell hooks in an interview with Maya Angelou for Shambhala Sun
Image description: A still image from the 90’s TV sitcom Saved By The Bell. Kelly and Jessie sit next to each other. Jessie looks off in the distance in contemplation. Kelly faces the camera with a look of determination (interpretation of scene my own). The caption reads, “I will not have my life narrowed.”
