#and the cast itself really isn't all that diverse when you get down to it | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

guriyuri · 7 months

Text

School Zone/「スクールゾーン」

🌸9/10🌸 (HIATUS)

A quirky yuri comedy about the chaotic daily life of high school girls! Yokoe and Sugiura have been together forever, and they've mastered the art of making trouble when life's a bore. High school might be a drag, but these girls in love know just how to inject a little chaos and comedy into their sloppy school life.

(Seven Seas Entertainment)

*occasionally listed as ‘School Zone Girls’

I fuckin LOVED school zone, man. There isn't a single character in it that isn't eeping out of their minds at all times. It throws almost all normal shonen/male-targeted troupes off of their kilter and is incredibly refreshing to read. One of its best qualities is its ability to maintain its identity outside of being a queer story- providing commentary on a wide range of topics relevant to high school, youth, etc. I can't really describe the effect of finally being able to read girls just being fucking stupid- other than saying its like running your brain under cold tap water, if your brain was a lesbian yuri enthusiast with a perpetual craving for full-cream milk. As silly as it may be, I actually genuinely enjoy its approach to w/w and adolescent relationship. 2 out of the 3 arguable 'main' three couples have one partner that is gender nonconforming/visibly queer, a rarity for contemporary yuri as a lot of works- to no fault of their own- fall into pitfalls of exclusively drawing hyper-feminine women to try present itself more believably or because it has no other way of proving to you that the characters are girls. The negative of this being that ostracises an entire group of people within the real-life lesbian community and disregards the instrumental role of butch lesbians in queer history by refusing them representation in a genre for them. Despite how I phrase this, though, I'm not exactly trying to present School Zone as a Magnum Opus or the pinnacle of political-correctness and singlehandedly defeating lesbophobia worldwide (which it did); I just cannot stress how badly we need diverse gender representation in yuri.

The main two girls are both fucking hilarious and strangely adorable in their own way (aside from being every gay couple to ever™). Their dynamic mostly consists of Yokoe being a combination of stupid, evil, and helplessly down bad and Kei being a single thread away from pulling a glock on her. If that can’t convince you to give szg a shot you’re a lost cause + I’m unplugging your life support. Anyways, they’re only one of the 3(ish) main pairings in the manga; but that’s where we get to the difficult part to talk about. Touched on some-what briefly, but too often to be able to ignore (iirc they have a handful of dedicated chapters), is Tsubaki’s incestuous crush on her sister Hiiragi. It’s kind of unfortunate this is in here and it sucks for me to have to mention but In this specific case I do think it’s worth overlooking for *so* many reasons. At its’ core their relationship is mostly focused on teenage adolescence and navigating complex familial relationships whilst still trying to grow up and find yourself. In isolation both Tsubaki and Hiiragi are very well written characters; on par with the rest of the cast and really are both very likeable. It’s when their relationship with eachother gets played up for fanservice is when they start to shit on your salad. Still, though, the author pretty clearly has no intention of actually writing them ending up together/Hiiragi reciprocating. So it’s highly likely Tsubaki’s character arc will lead her to move on, especially considering how she’s developed thus far. Last Couple worth discussing seriously is Fuji and Kishiya-san. While I was reading I was under the impression that Fuji + rest were high-school aged and Kishiya was in her first year at uni, but the only source I can find that lists their age says that Kishiya is a first-year high school student; which must make everybody else be in secondary school. Either way though, the age gap between them remains roughly the same and doesn’t really change my hot take on these two. Out of the entire cast Fuji is definitely the truest depiction of the experience of growing up sapphic, unknowingly. She is also my favourite :-). It was also refreshing to read about a girl who hasn’t figured it all out and is just kind of weird and off putting instead of elegant and tragic like the atmosphere of traditional yuri + made me feel weirdly heard? Call me biased, or a victim of grooming ALL you want but looking up to someone maturer, more in control, someone who feels above it all is someone you tend to gravitate towards when you’ve felt helpless and inept at understanding yourself your entire life. Much like Tsubaki and Hiiragi, Kishiya-san has yet to show any indication of reciprocating or even knowing of Fuji’s feelings and is what I think a genuinely positive influence on her. I can also imagine Kishiya-san fighting on the mental FRONTLINES to stay as patient and kind to Fuji as she is, aswell as taking the time to talk to her and treating her like a friend. Everyone please take a moment to acknowledge her service in the troubled youth industry.

There’s also Yatsude and Kaname but they’re pretty interesting so I’ll let you develop your thoughts independently on those two. They also have ZERO buisness being the most beautiful fucking women alive. The things I’d let Kaname do to me are to be repented for.

#girls love #yuri #yuri manga #gl manga #shoujo ai #百合 #school zone #school zone girls #スクールゾーン

39 notes · View notes

biggestthighestgeminiest · 9 months

Text

Here are my combined thoughts about Barbie (2023) as I saw it on the 18th and have had more time to think abt it.

Some good, some bad - overall I very much enjoyed it, laughed my ass off, cried quite a bit, was enthralled by the set and costume design, but left feeling like some things were off and perhaps not accomplished in the best way. This will all be delivered in bullet points in a very chaotic and random way and is NOT ordered in importance omg. Anyways i love media analysis and I will probably not explain this in the best way but HERE WE GO

the casting was fantastic, everyone read the assignment and lived their campiest life, margot robbie was phenomenal and ryan gosling absolutely killed me with laughter, glorious glorious

set design, costume, props,, perfection when it comes to bringing the mattel products to life. bangin'

i had that stupid fucking dog that eats and shits. i lost my mind when he came on hsdgkhakh

the message of barbie being representative of all little girls is still very lost on me. the idea brought up when barbie speaks to the teens, where they tell her that she gave them unrealistic body standards- well this never really gets resolved at all. Yes there was a diverse range of Barbies but they were all still beautiful in a conventional way that adheres to western beauty ideals. every barbie has perfect hair and skin and clothes even by the end of the movie. and yes i guess barbie is supposed to be this "above everything else" sort of divine feminine beauty but is still not representative of most young girls. as hilarious as the line narrator's line about margot robbie is, it sort of knows itself, that it is showing us the most perfect looking women, but doesn't address it at all beyond a simple joke. honestly what will mattel do beyond this? i imagine people will be more than happy with this movie so they won't have to make any big changes. i mean their "curvy" fashionista isn't close to being fat, and i don't believe they will ever make a barbie that isn't conventionally beautiful... so this movie just sort of gets to say it's about accepting yourself without actual real-life substance if that makes sense? it reminds me of that cartoon of all those diverse yet conventionally attractive models, with diverse people who don't fit those standards standing outside that box looking angrily. what's the point of the film at the end of the day when not addressing all those people left out of the conversation? also made me annoyed that cellulite was still the big thing that barbie was concerned about, like really?? it's a bad example as people are coming to embrace cellulite and it's also relatively easy to hide, i don't think they would have margot robbie have like, idk, dark under eye circles or a double chin,, idk someone say this better than me but the cellulite thing annoyed me (as someone who has loads of it!!)

the plot was BONKERS and i for one don't really care about plot holes or cartoon logic. there were some things that made me overthink about barbie lore and then i thought to myself that it doesn't really matter. the campiness of it is more important. im sure it will deter some people but again i dont mind it being silly in that way as long as it delivers on its messages and themes, which it does to a certain extent

absolutely lost it at the you are kenough shirt, ljadhkglkhd

as i said in a previous post i predicted that it was going to be the mom who was paired with barbie. i loved the idea sm and it was very heartwarming

i CRIED when barbie first sat down and watched the humans around her living their life, she was so overwhelmed by so many emotions and it was such a simple moment of show-dont-tell and man did i weep :))

i LOVED the ken bits and i did feel as though there was a bit too much ken. especially at the end. but at the same time i loved the dance sequence. its hard loving it so much yet wanting it not to have been to prevalent. i felt like it took away from the barbies a bit which goes against the whole point of the movie????

um the barbie's plans of distracting the kens was... i guess reminiscent of all these spy or superhero movies where women use their beguiling nature against men to get the upper hand? like i am woman so i will flirt with man to distract while my team escapes and hooho it works :)) it was slightly different and not overly sexy or about flirting but it still had the same undertone. like really? the best way to get the other barbies out was to continue to conform to patriarchal standards and pump the ken's egos? surely there's a better way? yes the kens are idiots and turning them against each other works but it still felt a bit icky. i guess i just find this trope annoying being like... ok i am being taken advantage of men so i will USE the thing they oppress me for against them,, idk surely surely there's another way.

also America's character's plan of kidnapping the barbies and ... using very true and very valuable feminist lines to snap them out of it felt... weird? like what she was saying was 100% true but taking them out of context and almost using them as one liners made them feel less serious???? like making women "wake up" by just telling them about how the patriarchy takes advantage of them is just... idk. like in real life women who are indoctrinated and truly believe misogynistic things won't just wake up by being told such a line. and i know the barbies are brainwashed to forget their powerful feminist backgrounds so it's not entirely comparable to the women i just mentioned but... idk it felt disingenuous. i did laugh my ass off at the guitar scene but it still had that ickiness attached like..

i would watch this movie again, no doubt about it and i will definitely pick up on new things and easter eggs etc

mattel's board did make me laugh, perfectly casted and performed but again- mattel has its name on this. they know what they are doing. they know we will love this movie and not demand any change. it will still be full of men controlling the output of production. it will still put out products that don't reflect all young people's desires. it will still make products that uphold current societal norms. so having these buffoons in the board meeting just gets soured a bit when knowing these people will still be in power in real life....

the ruth bit made me cry and no i do not care that her ghost is just around. i loved it

the marketing team knows exactly what they are doing. the huge push of promotion made me gobble up all their interviews and im sure people will be buying all the barbie products. i am yet another victim of capitalism and i will thank them for it when i inevitably buy their you are kenough sweater

again i loved this movie despite all the bad things abt it. i love being critical of the wider impact of this movie while still enoying it as a piece of media and entertainment. i needed this movie and fuck it i want to go to barbieland so bad. i know i shouldnt. i love ken and think about ken more than i do barbie which is fucked up but the movie also played into it in a way,, as described before. i mean even ryan gosling being so iconic in all the interviews is adding into this lol. how many people are posting videos of him vs videos of the actresses i wonder.

also cockring ken. BUT HE WASNT WEARING THE COCKRING SO WHATS THE POINT EVEN???

the narrator was an interesting choice, personally wasn't a huge fan of it but it did somewhat fit with the rest of the cinematic language of the story so i can't say much about it

mattel knows exactly what its doing with putting its name on this movie. i think greta did a great job despite the constraints that mattel probably put on her,, it's hard to tell if the flaws of the movie come from the corporation's infuence or from the writer and director's creative decisions, most likely it's a combo of both. again i believe that the actors and designers and production team did a fantastic job with what they had, they committed to the bit. i would have loved for the movie to have been better, but it is still a great film in my book. as said before i would watch it again and would still enjoy it despite the flaws. the himbo part of my brain can shake hands with the media literacy one and emerge with an overall positive experience, yet PLEASE do not think this is the ultimate feminist movie, it is a step in the right direction, it could have been better, and i understand if you don't like it at all. but also i dont think it would be right to blindingly love it and call it perfect bc it's not.

#barbie spoilers #barbie #that being said i still wore pink and fairy wing shoes to the movie #and sang i'm just ken to myself #pls feel free to share your own opinions #and again i believe someone else will probably express this in a better way than me #intersectionality is definitely important here too #i do not have the best formulated arguments for it tho #so i hope people contribute to the wider discussion!!#watch the movie! and form your opinions! and discuss! wee #barbie 2023 #the barbie movie #i will probably regret posting this

22 notes · View notes

zoobus · 11 months

Note

This is not me talking myself down but I can't really understand a lot of things you say because you have a bigger vocabulary and idk, you seems like write really well and I don't know if I don't understand some things properly bc English isn't my first language or... for some other reason, like a deficit or something... But what I understand though, I tend to agree with you and even when I don't agree I still like to think about it. Well, with all of this unnecessary and unasked information, I'll like to ask what you meant by your post about Nope (2022)? What was your interpretation? Tbh, to this day, I don't think it's a commentary about minorities. The only thing I think it could be seem like that is that thing with their father. Like, black people invented a lot of things and they were the first to do a lot of things, but they didn't get the recognition or the money they deserved most of the time so there's that. Often than that, I just think that the cast is black and there's the other dude who's not white... I don't remember much but I remember commenting with my brother that I thought it was cool that they were just, a diverse cast, with two black protagonists but they were just living their life and something fucked-up (presented itself as an opportunity) happened, that I thought it was cool that Jordan Peele didn't want to make the movie about racism. He does that greatly, but I believe black people want movies in which they are the ones acting/writing/producing/directing to be as diverse and full of possibilities as it always has been for white people, like, they want to have the opportunity to be in every possible story. True to be told, I'm not black... Or technically I am,,, second to some governmental organizations... Well, I'm pardo (kind of like mulatto), mother is black and father is white. I'm just saying this bc in Brazil, if you're pardo, chances are that you live like black people just with some more passability and has it easier than black people (pessoas retintas) but if you have any racial/class consciousness you understand some things that I'm afraid other mixed countries don't understand as well. But we're still racists as fuck so... I just rambled, idk. So what about Nope?

For me, part of the fun of movies and books is reading what other people took got from it. I love reading takes I would never imagine on my own, I love disagreeing with the consensus, and generally I think I’m able to consider, sympathize, and engage with opinions that differ from mine without losing confidence in my own interpretation.

So when I turned to Nope essays and the vast majority of them took it as a reflection of racial politics… I’m not exaggerating when I say I had a minor spiral. Was I stupid? Was I actually stupid? I didn't get any of that. I’m black. I’m privileged as hell, but I am African-American. I loved Get Out. Am I genuinely just a fucking moron who missed the obvious? Picking up media subtext is MY thing. That’s the one thing I’m good at. I had to rewatch Nope to prove I’m not an idiot. I must have been tired that day.

And maybe I am an idiot who missed all the subtext, but I’m more confident this time around saying I agree with you. I think a lot of people (including black people) are misconstruing unchangeable truths (the main characters are black) as social commentary. I think there is some amount of projection, that inclusion is inherently a political statement. Dare I say race is possibly clouding everyone’s perception. Take this popular essay excerpt:

Now look at this gif of OJ:

What about this suggests his character would have been at ease and unanxious if the crowd staring at him was black? What about him talking softly with his eyes glued to the floor suggests his discomfort stems from his marginalization as a black man? What did Peele add to his film that indicated OJ as racially-motivated-socially awkward rather than naturally awkward other than the fact that he’s black? It's plausible that racism could have made him like that but does the movie itself give us anything to make that assumption? I don’t think it does. I’ve seen some annoyed posts regarding autistic headcanons because they think these are just normal black man traits and um. No, shrinking violet who prefers animals to humans really aren't. I do know black dudes like OJ. I would not call them the Black Male Experience.

I find this viewpoint super frustrating – to plagiarize Margaret Atwood – White racism, white racism, is every fucking thing run by white racism? Pretending you have a personality of your own, that you can be an adorable, beloved Asian child star, Shy and awkward or boisterous and arrogant, it’s all motivated by white racism.

then the pa guy is confused as to where the “older one” is, clearly giving the message that he doesn’t trust oj to be a competent person. the pa sees him as an untrained boy,

reach. Ignoring the fact that people hate changes and learning your go-to expert died is a pretty significant change – oh yeah, the PA who was letting people walk directly behind a fucking horse just screamed “respectful of his subordinates/contractors if they’re white.”

The whites on the movie set were disrespectful, but imo I didn't see a compelling reason to read it as a commentary on how black men specifically are treated since the type of disrespect shown in that scene doesn’t come up for the rest of the film.

people talk about the horse, but they don’t know anything about the man riding it

None of those people knew anything about the horse. They don’t even mention the horse’s name. Like I get what you mean (jk no I don’t) but the people very much did not know or care about the horse. Here’s the script:

Emerald: Now did you know that the very first assembly of photographs in sequential order to create a motion picture was a two second clip of a Black man on a horse...? Yes it was, yes it was! Now some of y’all know Eadweard Muybridge, the grandfather of motion pictures who took the pictures that made that clip... but does anybody know the name of that Black jockey that rode the horse...? Holst: No Emerald: Nope. The first ever stunt man, animal wrangler and movie star rolled up in one and there’s almost no record of em… That man was a Bahamian jockey that went by the name of Alistair E. Haywood. My great great-grandfather.

I’m not even certain what to make of there being almost no record of him in the greater context of the movie’s themes about viewers feeling they’re entitled to consume/perceive another.

I find the assertion that the Peele made *any* parallels between the way animals are treated and the way poc are treated ungrounded. As I said in my original post, if your takeaway from Jupe’s generic sitcom and movie posters was that he’s EXACTLY as absurd as a chimp in a birthday hat, that the white family adopting an asian kid was commentary on token racism, you are literally just racist. There is nothing in this movie that suggests an insidious reason for his popularity.

The humans watch, the animals are watched until they do something drastic to make it stop. But none of the animals get characterization beyond that and none of the humans act in similar enough ways for me to derive anything from it. I don't recall anyone coercing OJ into unwanted eye contact. The glimpses we see of Jupe's childhood are of a cute kid on a corny sitcom set. The exploitation comes after the random monkey event, when SNL makes a parody skit and the world gradually forgets the gut-wrenching terror of being a little boy hearing your crush's flesh squished.

I am not saying race is irrelevant or that Peele had absolutely no intention of including subtext about black bodies or race exploitation in the film industry, but I am saying that I rewatched Nope specifically for that reading and I don’t find that reading compelling.

Unfortunately, I spent most of this complaining about what other people thought rather than my own. My interpretation was pretty surface-level. I think it was mostly about

respecting nature as it is and not what you imagine it is

somewhat about the nature of perception and how easily it’s distorted/how easy it is to believe you have a full understanding when you’ve only seen about an inch of it, and

something about feeling entitled to perceive things, idk I accept that I probably didn’t pick up on this theme as often as the director wanted me too. I’ll admit that.

#long post #niche effortposts #recommendations #because I do recommend it it was fun #nope (2022)#can you tell i have an urgent deadline ahead of me

34 notes · View notes

dogtoling · 1 year

Note

An annoying problem with Splatoon's story mode needlessly involving the idols is that it makes writing fanfics difficult. Sure, it can be a story set in the world of Splatoon, but if this is the world of Splatoon, then you'll want characters people can relate to. By recycling the idols as companions over and over, we don't get many new characters. S2 had zero new characters for the story mode, OE had C.Q. Cumber, Tartar, the crab who gives you stuff for completing mem cakes that I can't remember the name to, and to some extent, the idols, and S3 had the idols (and to some extent Mr. Grizz). That's all fine and all if they actually did something, but when they all literally just stand around and do nothing, it doesn't help using them as characters past "Marie, Callie, and Cuttlefish run the Splatoon."

The Agents themselves don't help either. By having every story mode make you an "Agent", it feels like every OC has to be an Agent, and it's a breath of fresh air when someone makes an OC who isn't. The Agents also have next to no personality traits or backstory to speak of. You're saving the world because Cuttlefish put an Agent suit on you and said Go, not because you have a reason to. They have no backstory besides "they moved to Inkopolis / Splatsville recently" and no personality traits past "Agent 3 doesn't talk and is super serious" "Agent 4 doesn't watch TV". Agent 8 at least had some sort of backstory, although pulling an "I have amnesia" on us doesn't help her case. She's an Octo who heard Calamari Inkantation and is now fighting to get out of the Metro. But we don't know any specifics about her life prior to the Metro.

Just my thoughts.

Okay THIS! This is one of the reasons I (and MANY OTHER PEOPLE by the looks of it) are so done with the NSS and the idols as recurring characters. The Splatoon world IS HUGE and the developers clearly have endless, even complex character ideas. The world is so big and so complex and we see none of it because every "story" that we're given in Splatoon deliberately REMOVES YOU FROM THAT WORLD... then spoon feeds you some chosen hero arc with the same zero-personality supporting cast over and over again that's really only a supporting cast if you as the player have a sentimental attachment to the characters (they don't do anything in the game and usually have like 1 personality trait.)

Like, just imagine if the stories in Splatoon had the freedom to be detached from the idols and if they had the freedom to tell smaller, down-to-earth stories that felt much more personal and took place in actual facets of the world. They could craft a colorful cast of characters that actually had purpose in that setting and there's no reason you COULDN'T still make those characters marketable and fan-favorite! There's literally so much you can do with stories within the Splatoon world and somehow all the Splatoon stories completely miss the mark and I don't know how they keep doing it. It almost feels like they're purposefully avoiding fleshing out the world or the characters of the game, lol

And this is something that I find really strange because isn't one of Splatoon's driving themes the freedom of self expression and like, diversity? Then why are we always playing as some character who's void of personality and doing some random crap in an environment that's emptier than the local mall during May 2020. The world is out there, WHY AREN'T WE? Believe it or not, before Octo Expansion's release and Off the Hook becoming super popular, the Splatoon fandom WAS full of independent OCs that were just... guys that live in the Splatoon world, and the world itself was a huge focus because that was like, the THING. But after the game became deliberately character-focused, there was a huge boom where nowadays instead of random OCs with no ties to the canon characters, everyone's OCs essentially ARE the canon characters. So instead of having a colorful cast of people in a wacky world, it's more like we all have our own AU of the same exact things happening differently and it's... well. The world hasn't been the fandom focus for a long-ass time and watching it feels like some kind of cultural death lol. And I can't blame anyone, especially not the newer fans, because the world hasn't even been NINTENDO'S focus and they're the ones who made it.

#mailbox #sorry for all the splatoon story salt lately LOL i have a LOT OF THOUGHTS ON THEM #hopefully some of you find these enjoyable or interesting to read

24 notes · View notes

jovenshires · 6 months

Note

Hey the new Ianthony edit? Made me emo as fuck it really had me in my feels very cool.

I didn't see it on the 'smosh' tag? Idk if that's intentional thought you should know if it's not <3 -dot hell anon

TYSM i had so much fun making that one so im glad <3333

ah yeah... that was intentional. old habits die hard i guess? this got a little away from me so i put my extremely long rant under the cut, but tlwr: i try not to tag a lot of shipping stuff as /smosh.

see, i'm not new to the smosh fandom, but i am relatively new to THIS version of the fandom. i came back a couple of months ago but my real heyday was in like. 2018-2020. and we had pretty set rules for how we went about things, and one of the BIG ones was to never put anything ship-related in the main tags (those tags being cast names and the main smosh tag itself).

this was for a couple different reasons; first of all, some of the actual smosh staff was on tumblr (the official smosh blog for one, and i think one of the cast used tumblr at the time?? not sure on that one though as i Cannot remember), and we didn't want them to have to view rpf of themselves in spaces just generally meant for posting about them/their company. like say courtney, for example, goes into the 'courtney miller' tag - there's a difference between seeing a post about her bit in the new tntl and a post about them. fucking ian nasty style. not that there's anything wrong with the latter, just that i am very conscientious about not showing the real person fiction to the real person(s) in question, as was a lot of the smosh fandom.

second of all, not every smosh fan is into rpf. our venn diagram is not a circle. there was a time when i was not a part of the venn diagram. it's why i try to tag every post with 'shipping' and/or 'rpf' when it even vaguely hints at the stuff, so that not everybody has to see it. this isn't exclusive to this topic - i would do that for anything divisive. so, yeah, casual smosh fans scrolling the main tag probably don't want to see my silly ship edits, and i get that!!

since i've returned we obviously have a much different fandom culture - the old smosh blog shut down years ago and i'm fairly certain none of the cast checks tumblr anymore (and if they do and they're reading this: i'd like to apologize and beg for them to block me for both of our sanities). i've also made a few exceptions to my own rule, such as with the incorrect tweets bc i think those can mostly be written off as jokes and the lil au edits though i regret that at times. (i've been considering un-tagging those for a while tbh.) i've also realized recently that the tag 'smosh fic' just gets sorted directly into the 'smosh' tag which is. a pain in the ass. that's not what i said tumblr and you know it. so some of my content has been filtered in there. but you'll notice with the lil clips and text posts i post and stuff i almost never tag it as 'smosh' because. i just don't need people to see it ya know. i've got my people here and that's enough for me <3

that is all to say by the way that the new fandom culture is not BAD. as we all know, i'm very pro-rpf, so seeing rpf out there is great (as long as you know it's not tinhatting etc etc). we also have a very diverse community now with a lot of interesting ships and great fics that i would never have found without casually scrolling through the smosh tag!! it's also easier nowadays to block tags than ever; casual fans can just block the 'shipping' tag and have (relatively) easy access to the smosh tag. so please all of you keep doing you - i'm not your mother and i don't expect you to listen to lil ole me where i live perched up on my soap box. BUT idk if i personally can get over my hang-ups about tags.

#ask #asks #anon #anonymous #discourse #i guess??? not really its just my rambling thoughts about an issue long since dead that No One else has thought about #dot hell anon #shipping

5 notes · View notes

misscrawfords · 1 year

Note

☕️ and historical accuracy in period dramas?

Been thinking about this on and off all day because it's quite complex. On the one hand, I don't care because no drama is ever truly accurate. On the other hand, I'm pernickety and fussy and get really annoyed about certain things. So...

I think if I were to try and sum up my feelings, it would be that I am not a historian and therefore I am not overly educated about exactly what is and isn't accurate but I do care a lot about internal consistency within a drama and, if it's an adaptation of a novel, that it is a faithful and interesting adaptation of that novel.

I think pure historical accuracy complaints can be quite problematic. They can be used to be racist - "there were no black people in Regency England!" - I mean, that's just not true. What is considered "accuracy" is in fact not accurate at all! Or sexist - "the Medieval period [itself a very wide ranging and diverse period historically and geographically] was a terrible time to be a woman and we just have to include lots of graphic rape scenes because it's being accurate, nothing we can do, sorry, we care so much about accuracy". This isn't about accuracy at all, it's about perpetuating a false vision of the past which fits with personal prejudices.

I guess I'd like more period dramas that were genuinely historically accurate - that present Medieval England as colourful and vibrant and intellectually buzzing and interestingly religious. That explores a wider range of identities in the Regency period than the world of Jane Austen's books. (And there is SO much out there to adapt that is not Austen... And I love Austen. But seriously.) You zone into any year in history in any location and guaranteed it's more weird and wonderful and diverse than anything you previously imagined.

So I don't think any adaptation really gets it right, historically speaking. It always presents history through a lens which often says more about the makers of the drama and their target audience than the history itself.

However, some things really annoy me. My main bugbear is the hair thing. And, like, fine if you're going to not care at all about any kind of relation to historical hair styling, but when 95% of your cast has really decent looking ringlets or whatever, but your ingenue heroine has her hair down and looks like she's never heard of a hairbrush just to signify her ~innocence or whatever, it really gets me. It's such lazy visual storytelling and it takes me out of the drama because I'm immediately thinking, "If I were walking along a cliff in a stiff wind, I'd be tying my hair back - isn't it annoying having it blow in your mouth all the time???" or "All your sisters have their hair up, why are you standing out? Why is nobody complaining about this?" So that really does annoy me a lot. And it doesn't even look good. That sort of hair looks a MESS. But it's more the poor look and inconsistency within the film and how dull a characterisation technique it is that pisses me off, than the accuracy because tbqh I have never studied historical hair styling so I don't really know the details.

Also costumes - if you are supposedly setting a drama in a particular year or period and you are taking some effort with costumes, then there needs to be consistency! (I don't mean that if a character is poor or old-fashioned then they shouldn't wear appropriate clothes) but you shouldn't have your heroine where a dress from 1815 one day and 1786 another! Emma 2020 is a brilliant example of how you can make amazing, consistent costumes and still be a very modern adaptation. Mr Malcolm's List also did a great job. So when adaptations don't bother because they're too edgy or whatever, then I have a low opinion of them because you can have high standards and be fun and modern and successful.

Similar to speech and dialogue. It all depends. If you're creating a fantasy version of the past (like Bridgerton), it's one thing, but if you are adaptating something from that period and doing a serious adaptation, then you need to take your source material seriously.

tl;dr: don't be Persuasion 2022. What an insulting pile of garbage that was on every front. The cast deserved better!

Send me a ☕️+ a topic and I'll give you my opinion!

#period dramas

10 notes · View notes

bonetrader · 5 years

Text

Unusual RPG combinations

I like to tinker with mixing and matching rpg settings and systems. I will try to collect the ones I'm most fascinated with. I haven't found the opportunity to actually try any of these combinations, but I guess it doesn't hurt to put them out there in case someone finds any of them interesting.

Shadowrun redux

Setting: Shadowrun

System: Blades in the Dark

I adore Shadowrun. It takes all the bleakness of reality, amplifies it, but also mixes it with a lot of magic and wonder. And if you read the books selectively, even with hope.

But playing it can get convoluted, especially if your group is prone to overplan. And we know that plans always go sideways. There's no such thing as a milk run. Spending an hour on planning can be annoying in itself. But it's extra painful if it has to be thrown out the window in the first five minutes of execution.

Enter Blades in the Dark that instead of planning ahead encourages to use flashbacks on the spot to reveal how you prepared in advance to get past an obstacle. That makes pulling off daring heists a lot more easier for the players. Infiltration is way less stressful on the player if they can make up any forged backstory on the go, and do a flashback to make sure it's believable. There's still some minimal planning, but it's practically just setting the starting scene of the run. You don't have to specify anything beyond that.

The concept of crew from Blades also fits nicely with Shadowrun. It can tell the GM what kind of runs the players prefer, and gives the players the ability tospecialize their team. Blades was created for a different level of technology and magic. But it mainly focuses on the hierarchy of the criminal underground, and that translates easily even to a modern world. So I expect the same crews to work with Shadowrun, but more thematic options could be added to tie it closer to the sixth world.

The concept of hunting grounds should be reconsidered. In Blades it means a specific neighbourhood the characters are more familiar with and usually target. In Shadowrun it makes more sense to make it a specific scenery they usually operate in. For example it could be a specific megacorporation they often go up against, or a type of gang that's common in the sprawls they operate in.

Blades also offers a nice subsystem for handling reputation, growth, notoriety, and even stress and trauma between runs. Incorporating a specific vice for each PC also seems completely in line with Shadowrun's concept.

The biggest difference will be in character creation. Blades' system is more abstract than Shadowrun's. In Blades you have to pick a specific playbook for your character. I think that's OK. While Shadowrun allowed building characters skill by skill, it always encouraged working toward specific archetypes like face, rigger, or adept. Your playbook determines your starting stats, but you can still somewhat specialize it. Blades also allows crossing from a playbook to a new one, but that's long term character advancement.

Adding some elements of Shadowrun might not be trivial. Spirits could be more or less handled as the ghosts in Blades. But magic and technology would have to be specifically addressed. Some of it could be treated like fluff, making it mechanically irrelevant whether your efforts are more effective because of training, because of an implant, or because you are infusing them with magic. But at least mages, riggers and deckers would probably need their own playbooks.

Twisted Houses of the Drow

Setting: any fantasy setting with drows, but I have a specific campaign idea for Spelljammer

System: Houses of the Blooded

This is a re-skin of Houses of the Blooded. The ven and the drow have different values and cultures, but I think they share a similar style. Decadence and intrigue runs deep in their societies. I'd replace the virtues (attributes) of the original game with corresponding vices. And each vice would be linked to a drow god instead of the totem animals of the original game.

Instead of the romance mechanic there would be rivalry. It would work the same way, just with a different flavour. Drows could pick someone as a rival, driving each other to greater feats. Instead of creating art drows could develop schemes. Same as the art mechanic. The scheme could give a bonus to those it was shared with. Seasons, regions, holdings, and blessings would have to be reworked, but I think renaming them would be enough in most cases.

My campaign idea is for a group of drow renegades employed by the elven admiralty as covert agents. They would be sent for long term infiltration missions to places where surface elves are not welcome. Each of them would have an affiliation with a drow god as well, and each would have their own hidden agenda. It might even work if not all characters are drows. I could imagine one or two elf, half-elf, or shapeshifter mixed in.

If I ever got to it seasons of the campaign would include: Building up a career of piracy in space (remember, Spelljammer) to get on the good side of a notorious and elusive pirate king, and lead the elven navy to its hideout. Instead of holdings the players could manage trade routes they raid, and their ships. Another would be infiltrating a drow city to stop an invasion. I think this would be the closest to the original Houses game. And finally I'd drop them in a mission to arrive as inmates to Elfcatraz, the secret prison of the admiralty (named by one of my players) to find out who's really in control there.

Around Cerilia in 80 days

Setting: Birthright

System: Primetime adventures

This one is kind of cheating, because Primetime adventures is quite setting-independent. So I rather mean it's a better fit for the kind of stories I'd like to run in this setting.

Birthright's setting works on a comprehensible scale for me. Most fantasy worlds have gigantic continents with dozens of large countries. They are too large for me, and I end up with a vast countryside where everything's the same for weeks to go. But Birthright has a small continent, maybe more like a large island with five distinct cultural regions. And each of those regions have a dozen provinces, each province described with its own flavor. It's not complicated, but colorful.

I guess it was done this way to accomodate the strategy aspect of Birthright that was one of its main features. While the concept of ruling provinces sounds great, the setting really makes me want to have a game about just travelling through this world. Not with adventurers, but rather with tourists, merchants, travelers who are going there to see a foreign place, or do business with the locals, and not just to explore a dungeon that happens to be there.

Ever since I saw the Roman Mysteries TV series I've been particularly fascinated with the idea of having a bunch of kids as player characters who are brought along by one's aunt/uncle on business trips to foreign lands, and get into trouble there. For example a trip from a frontier barony to the capital city, traveling through the woods of wary elves, then sailing down the river, stopping in a few more interesting port. Or a journey to the magnificent kingdoms in the east, although there are many perils both natural, and man-made on the way.

Thinking in Primetime adventures terms each province or city could be a separate episode. And the peculiarities of the place could be used to decide which character's spotlight episode should happen there.

Even domains of awnshegh (people and animals infected by the power of a dead god of darkness, becoming "monsters") don't have to be off limits. Some of them were quite sociable, and even more ruled over people whose perspective could be interesting.

Crown of Wings

Setting: Council of Wyrms

System: Birthright's domain management

Council of Wyrms focuses on playing dragons from various clans who work together. Despite the central role of the council, and the politics between the dragon clans, Council of Wyrms didn't touch much on the actual politics and realm management. It was the same AD&D, just scaled up to dragon PCs.

But I think there's so much more potential in the setting. I could easily imagine dragons ruling the land, managing guilds, and churches, and building out ley line networks to cast spells affecting whole realms. So everything that Birthright's system offered.

The setting isn't fully fleshed out, but it lets us fill in the land with fantastic locations. Some cities and towns were mentioned at unusual places, full of various races. So players could run wild with ideas when they create their own domain. Should their be trade routes with a merfolk city, and underwater ley lines? Absolutely. Could there be a church based on promoting the halfling lifestyle? Why not?

And then there's the Council. Domain Power could determine the character's status in it. Regency Points, and Gold Bars could be used as bargaining chips.

But what should be its purpose? I have seen enough of the trope of warring factions who have to be unified against some common threat, maybe with a traitorous faction thrown in the mix. I mean it makes for a fine story, but I'm getting a little tired of it. This time I'd rather see a council as a way to trade, to exchange ideas, and to help everybody improve their own clan. It doesn't make for a strong narrative, but I think it's a more positive message overall.

I think the biggest restriction in the setting is that dragon clans are too homogenic. Like, each clan consists of just one kind of dragon. That doesn't help in putting together a game with diverse characters. The original game concept solved that by making the PCs agents of the Council who may come from various clans.

For a more political game we could introduce mixed clans. So the characters could be part of the same clan, while still coming from various places. Maybe they are outcasts or survivors who created their own clan. Or maybe their clan was open minded, and was located in a central place, so it naturally lead to it becoming more diverse.

Or we could say that they are from different clans, but their clans are neighbours and allies of each other. At least if you're like me, and you don't want to set the players up for PvP by putting them to opposing sides of a clan feud.

Custom Quest

Setting: Your long-running campaign

System: Fiasco

I think any campaign that went on for a while should be an easy source for creating a Fiasco playset for a one-time play. Fiasco is about nobodies trying to pull off something bigger than they are. It's about petty people, and half-baked ideas going wrong. And while that might still sound like your average adventurer party, here we know they can't win. They will be lucky if they don't end up in a lot worse situation they started in.

For convenience I will refer to the PCs of the original campaign as heroes. It's okay if they are not actual heroes. That happens pretty often. But they had the greatest influence on the campaign this one shot is based on, so we have to heavily rely on them.

So the player characters in this one-shot are probably just background noise in the original campaign. I think this is a great way to explore how the actions of the heroes might affect the common people in unexpected ways. Objects driving the character dynamics could be things the heroes brought back, created, or just used in a memorable moment. Maybe an artifact they sold off is making its rounds on the blackmarket, and someone sees an opportunity in it. Or evidence surfaced that could incriminate one of the heroes.

And it's not just Objects. Their shenanigans might have brought the unwanted attention of a powerful cult to the city. Or the local barkeep loathes the heroes because they trashed his place one too many times. And he's just looking for some idiots to exact his revenge. Really, just look for whomever the heroes might have ever slighted or aided to get a plethora of petty plots and strange driving forces in the community. This can give you the Needs and Relationships between the player characters.

Locations could be places well known by the players, preferably close to a place the heroes frequent. The heroes, and the more memorable NPCs could give some enjoyable cameos. And finally they could become part of the Tilt table to turn a bad situation worse in the middle of the game.

#tabletop rpg #fiasco #drow #Houses of the Blooded #Birthright #shadowrun #spelljammer #Blades in the Dark #Primetime Adventures #Council of Wyrms #rpg #rpg combos

7 notes · View notes

arethereanyoriginalusernames · 5 years

Text

Character Spotlight 1, P1

DAMIAN BEELZY

DISCLAIMER BECAUSE YES,

I do not own zoophobia. Zoophobia would belong to the lovely Vivian Medrano (I believe that's how her last name is spelt? Meh, I'll check later), otherwise known as Vivziepop

Also, while yes, this is a series where I am going to be critical of the source material, this is NOT a critique of vivziepop herself, as zoophobia is...2, 3 years old? It'd be unfair to judge her and her writing skills based on something she did a while ago.

I'm not doing this because I hate the source material either. On the contrary, I love Zoophobia. The reason I'm doing this is because I believe that if we find flaws in media we enjoy, we could all learn something valuable from it, and apply it to our own work.

If you disagree with something stated here, that's alright. Feel free to tell me what you think and ask questions. I'm not telling you what to think. I simply hope you enjoy.

I apologize for wasting your time.

-ATOUN

-----------------------'---------------

......So, I'm back.

I've already talked about Dame before in my favorite zp characters list. I've already stated why I like him. For anyone who might not have seen that list, let me give you a spicy recap. I found Dame to be one of the more entertaining characters throughout the comic and he was one of the better written characters during the 5-ish chapters we got from this series. I've already stated what I like about him, so let's just get into some things I don't like.

Oh come on, let's be honest. We all know why we're here. We all can see how much attention my least favorite character list got compared to my favorite list (even if admittedly some of that attention was me thanking people, which btw is something I should really do more often ). You're all here because you want me to tear a hole in this series. It's the same reason most people watch car racing. We don't wanna see who wins. We wanna see some epic car crashes.

Still, I want to start with critiques towards this character I don't agree with.

-----------------------------------

1. Damian is a bad main character because he only has negative character traits

A character having only bad character traits does not in itself mean a character is bad. If that character is poorly written, then it's a bad character. Also, I'd advise you read chapters 3 and 5 where Dame is shown to have some good traits about him. (Ex. Chapter 5 where he expresses concern for Addi )

2. Damian's design is too bland compared to other characters

While I agree with this to some extent, something I want to say here is that Dame is not unique in this regard. You could apply this to Spam, Vanex, Jackie, and Kayla as well. This is more aimed at those who single Damian out as the only one with this problem.

3. Damian is a bad villain

Damian is not meant to be the antagonist. He has been confirmed to be apart of the main cast, and you'll notice that in all of Vivz's villain line ups, he is not present. At most, he may a rival or adversary to either zill or Jack.

4. He is unoriginal as a character.

.....and any other characters in media today are? It's very rare in this day and age to come across anything 100 % original. It's even been proposed that there are no longer any original ideas left. Besides, a character being bad does not mean the character itself is bad. At most, it's a reflection on the writers laziness.

5. He's too edgy.

Ah yes, a commonly used complaint you'll hear spouted by angsty 13 year olds who think (despite the fact "edgy" characters are often fan favorites since they often turn out to be the most interesting / relatable characters ) that edginess = bad, and that anything bad happening to a character like, I dunno, EMOTIONAL ISSUES THAT REAL PEOPLE DEAL WITH makes that character edgy by default. Edginess can be done wrong, but not every edgy character is bad. Shut your pie hole, and hustle your buns out of my Italian styled soup kitchen, you cotton headed ninny mugginses. *cue air horns*

Also, hunny, if you hate edgy characters, oh boy, you do NOT wanna read ANY of my stories.

----------------------------------------

There. Now onto the main event. The butchering of a popular character. Let's get ready to break the hearts of fan girls everywhere! MUAH-HAHAHA!

Actually, I wasn't really able to find too much wrong with a character save for a) something completely subjective, b) something related more to a problem a have with zp's pacing as opposed to the character and c) a concern about how the character is written.

A) Damian being too much of a jerk. I disagree with this, but I didn't mention this above because. ...yeah, some people can feel that Dame is too much of a jerk, and I get why. It's more subjective as this attributes more to a subjective opinion on the character.

B) Damian's freak out in chapter 3. It's just the pacing in that scene that gets to me. It feels as though Dame goes from 0 to 6 in only a few frames and that entire segment where he's slowly becoming angrier and angrier feels rushed. According to Dame's character sheet (shown above ) Damian is supposed to be good at hiding his more demonic tendencies, but you would've never guessed that from this scene. This is something that kind of happens throughout zoophobia where the pacing with be slow, then all of a sudden, we just speed through an entire scene. For instance, the start of chapter 5 is pretty slow. However, we speed through the scene with Tom so fast, his appearance doesn't really do much or become really memorable. This more of a story problem and less of a character problem.

Now.... onto c.

First of all, by concern, I'm referring to something that might be a problem depending on how the rest of zoophobia turns out. The problem with both critiquing and defending Zoophobia is that we only have 5 chapters to go off of to determine its quality. This is something more like the tangent I had about Addison in my least favorite character list. I suggest for this, you grab a spoonful of salt and force it slowly down your throat as you read this as my concerns could easily be proven wrong here.

So what problem could I possibly foresee? Well, for an example of what I'm about to discuss, let me take you to a dark corner of the internet. The RWBY fandom. Specifically, let me introduce you to one of it's main cast

Blake Belladonna.

For anyone outside the loop, Blake is (currently ) one of the most hated characters in the series. There are many reasons why, but for this, I'm going to lock in on one problem in particular. Throughout Volumes 1-5, Blake was notorious for being an inconsistent character. Granted, in volumes 1 and 2, this was not a problem unique to Blake as the writers were still trying to figure out how to write her and the rest of the characters. They couldn't decide weather they wanted Blake to be the introverted, bookworm, straight man character, or to be silly. In later volumes, however, the problem just got worse. While all the other characters were sorted out and had settled on their own personalities, Blake's character seemed to change whenever she was in a new scene. While it's not bad for a character to have multiple sides to them, this is not how you want to do it. One scene, Blake was a bitch who wanted nothing more than to be left alone. Next scene, she was an emotionally mature figure helping her gay chameleon friend with issues. Next scene, she was a trauma victim. Next scene, she was a freedom fighter fighting oppression. Next scene, she was a badass haunted by her past. Next scene, back to bitch.

You see the problem?

This made Blake a hard character to fully connect with, and eventually, the fandom ended up agreeing that Blake is better whenever the scene isn't focused on her.

So what does this have to do with Damian? Well, one thing I noticed with him when I first dipped my toe into this fandom was the three main interpretations of Damian's character there seemed to be. One, a flirty, yet cartoon villainy jerk; two, a misunderstood, rebellious boi who was somewhat mischievous; or three, an overposessive, yet tolerable brat who hated not getting his way. Just to clarify, I'm referring to fans who had only read the comic and had not seen any posts about him from Vivz.

I pondered why during the third zoophobia rewrite, and I eventually came to this conclusion : the type of Damian fans seemed to remember depended on WHICH Dame they remembered best, Ch2, Ch3, or Ch5. Why? Well, it basically wolloped me upside the head after reading a post where Dame's personality was described as "diverse". Because yeah.... It's diverse alright.

Let's put Dame under a microscope for a second and go through each of his appearences, and his character sheet which (someone correct me if I'm wrong ) came out between ch. 2 and ch.3.

His character sheet lists the following about his personality : he ranges from mischievous to a downright brat, he loves entertaining and messing with others and making them laugh, he's flirty, he's open, he can be spoiled or arrogant at times, he gets bored easily, and he is secretly lonely but hard to impress and has an enormous heart. He also has a dark side he's good at hiding

CH 1. Appears to be that one kid who enjoys messing with others, acts slightly flirty towards Kayla, and doesn't seem to take much very seriously.

Ch 2. I've often described this Dame as sociopathic, because honestly, he kinda is. He doesn't care about anyone here but himself. He acts flirty towards Kayla, and torments both Zill and Jack just to further his goal of charming a girl he supposedly knows will "give into temptation eventually " and he's outright manipulative here. He even finds Zill's pain amusing to some extent and mocks him and Jack while aggressively leaning on his cousin (probably to assert dominance (can aggressively leaning be the new t-posing? Please? ))

CH 3. Dame still has some lack of empathy, finding the idea of his cousin being burned alive funny, however this seems to be limited to just Jack. He's a lot more fun loving here, as seen in him running around town with his friends. He darker side makes an appearance. We see him entertaining others at the beginning, and oddly enough, he's more self conscious here. He gets embarrassed by Tenta, is bothered when he is teased about his nanny, and is triggered by the priest spouting that tasty religious bull shit. His conversation with his parents also makes him seem like he needs his daddy's approval, and may have daddy issues.

CH 5. Here, he's more of a brat. He's possessive of Addi, and at the beginning, he's more flirty and care free.

Thus far, Vivz seems to switch between various sides of dame depending on what she needs him to be for a certain scene. As scene with Blake, this isn't something that really works out well. And it's not like Vivz can't write characters with different sides to them. We see her do this with Jack, Kayla, and Cameron. In one chapter, these characters can show more then one side to them. In Damian's case, he's like play-doh. He just molds into whatever Vivz needs instead of just being his own character.

Like I said before though, this is a concern. Future chapters can easily prove me wrong here. This is just the sad ramblings of a Canadian who is obsessed with covering themselves in glitter. Tell me what you guys think and if you enjoyed!

Now to wait for zoophobiapika to either message me or reblog this, quoting a line from it.....

#zoophobia #zoophobia damian

30 notes · View notes

sagebodisattva · 5 years

Text

The Sword of Deconstruction

For a markedly deep philosopher, an answer never really answers anything much at all.....

You know, there are a lot of different theories, postulations, philosophical concepts, scientific proposals, and theological prognostications, concerning the nature of life and existence, but have you ever noticed that all of them, and I do mean ALL of them, without exception, have awareness as a foundation? Now, I don't mean the theories and stories themselves, as they do go to great lengths to guide us away from our own awareness, and shine the spotlight of interest onto inventory items and conceptual projections, that cast the fundamental center of reality outwards onto extrinsic phenomena; what I mean, is that all of these assertions about the possibilities of meaning and function, through various applications of ideology, all have awareness at the core.

You wanna talk about the philosophy of metaphysical existentialism? Awareness is the foundation. You want to speak about the material universe, evolution and the quantum properties of objects? Awareness is the foundation. You prefer to frame things through the idea of a supernatural supreme deity that created a medium of interaction? Awareness is the foundation. All theories about life start from awareness.

Even the famous philosophical proposition by Rene Descartes, “Cogito ergo sum”; translated to mean, "I think, therefor I am", starts with awareness as the foundation. And so, it's inaccurate really. What makes “you” an "am", is not thinking. Which, more aptly stated, becomes: There is awareness; therefor there is cognizance of an agency identified as a self, that has the capacity to think and experience appearances. It all starts with awareness.

I am aware of an experience of appearances, and I call that a reality. This is all an honest philosopher, or scientist, or anyone else concerned with the nature of existence, could possibly say, in truth. You are aware of an experience of appearances, and call that a reality. To gain an understanding into what exactly this is; what the nature of awareness, experience, appearances, and reality, is; one would have to explore it for themselves, and, due to the format of this setup, this can only investigated by oneself by delving into the depths of the very thing that is the foundation of this configuration: the awareness that is providing the platform of inquiry. This is what is most true, most clear, most immediate, most verifiable, by virtue of just being aware of it.

There's nothing to say or point out about the appearances that is going to shed light on this simple undeniable truth, although we like to try, don't we? And just by doing this, we have already lost the clarity of the truth, which just is, and doesn't need any explanations. You are already it. So why do you need this to be explained to you? You are aware. This is what you are. This is the nature of your so called existence. The proof and evidence is right there. What further needs to be explained to you? Isn't already being aware self evident enough, in itself? We are aware, and wow, look at that. There is something to be aware of. And this is the apparent stumbling block. So maybe I can find out some answers about this awareness by investigating what I am aware of? And just like that, clarity is lost, delusion begins, and ideological masturbation begins.

As soon as we start looking at what awareness is aware of, as a source of inquest, we are already reaching into the wrong place, and so then, it should be no surprise whatsoever, that any answers obtained therein, are going to be spurious. So then you can just imagine what kind of convoluted murky swamp of delusion develops when one begins to form attachments; that is, identifications and associations with these false appearances. Then, these false attachments become foundations for truths that are based on the erroneous. And getting out of this sticky mess is also difficult; because, due to the jumbled quagmire produced by these false identifications and associations, even the way out is misconstrued, and so, the lost self thinks freedom from the entanglement will somehow be found by digging even deeper into the entanglement. It's virtually inescapable. A veritable quicksand.

So this is why, when you step forth to point outwards, and open your mouth to speak about phenomenal content, you are, at the least, just blowing a bunch of hot air, or, at the worse, misguiding and enabling others to stay mired in delusion. This is the greatest disservice, and an injustice, if ever there were such things.

You might as well get this straight right now: There isn't going to be any spiritual progress, any new age of enlightenment, any existential transcendence, any great vibrational ascension, nor any other proposed shift into a new chapter of the evolution of consciousness, until the secrets of the inner connectivity of reality and the mind are explored and uncovered. What the hell else are you waiting for? It's not gonna happen all by itself. It's got nothing to do with a prophetic date on a calendar. Unrelated to the cycles, alignments, and activities of the stars or celestial bodies. Far from being associated with a god, or the coming of some savior that is gonna pick you up and carry you across the finish line. Not found in the exploration and discoveries made about the fabric of space and time of a material universe. Not conditional to a political revolution, tuning into a frequency, deciphering ancient texts or artifacts, or the arrival of some race of benevolent or malevolent extraterrestrials.

No, the metamorphosis you are anticipating is not going to come about by waiting for some external event to unfold. These proposed events are all very elaborate and effective diversions from the truth. An error made by the misjudgment of the appearances of illusion, which fosters the tendency for us to take the considerations of life a bit too literally.

Again, it all comes back to the foundation of existence. It's right there at your fingertips, yet you refuse to investigate it. Don't get me wrong, I understand why this seems like a daunting task, despite being the most accessible avenue you have. The external world is the ultimate attention whore. It is taxing and overwhelming, and pulls the focus towards it constantly. There are so many fascinations, narratives and objects of desire. It's no wonder that the source of attention is the very last place it would occur for anyone to consider. Well, guess what. You are not going to discover anything of real import or significance by searching out there. Seeking to leave no stone unturned is not going to get the job done. Just the notion of a search is already the wrong approach. You are already that which needs to be investigated. There's nothing to find because you are already it. Move inwards, into that which precedes the ego, which is also a part of the external projections, and become intimate with the source of attention.

Maybe the pull of the external world is too loud and strong, and you find yourself hindered at every step, so this may require you to take a more proactive approach, where you become a existential warrior, a Ronin samurai of sorts, employing the sharp cutting blade of the sword of deconstruction. The world is demanding, but it only holds such sway over you because you are heavily attached and invested in it. You have established many identifications and associations with the world, and these binding stakes, which are heavy fixations of value, purpose, meaning and narrative, represent the opposing warriors on the field of battle, who seek to defeat you through your voluntary surrender to illusion. Don't allow illusion to remain your master. Take up your sword of deconstruction and begin to cut down these established investments of identifications with the false. You hesitate because they seem like your friends, as they have been with you for most of your life, but they over encumber you with a heavy burden. The actual cost of maintaining these exacting relationships is so much more of a strenuous effort then simply letting go, despite letting go seeming so difficult. It's only seemingly difficult because desire rules your ego, and your ego is the master over awareness, because it is a distracting fickle spoiled brat that constantly snags the attention with it's wants and woes; and the deep cravings it has to be unique and special. But remember, you are not the ego. The ego stands on the field of battle among the opposing foes of illusion as a boss and warlord, leading the charge against you. Take up your sword and fight.

0 notes