#andrew nicholl | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

denimbex1986 · 19 days

Text

'Scrolling social media lately has been, for Gen X at least, a chance to swim in a glittering ocean of nostalgia. Normally, I’ve no time for the rose-tinted spectacles sported by the golden-agers of Facebook – the ones with a tendency to pen terrible poems about the glory days of the 1950s. (“We played on the bombsite and skinned our knees/and all the beds at home had fleas”). But when it’s my generation, which grew up in the ‘70s and ‘80s, nostalgia is a powerful and intoxicating drug. So why do we feel nostalgia?

Back in time with One Day

One Day, the Netflix adaptation of David Nicholls’ novel about Emma and Dex and their long, ’80s-to-’00s friends-to-lovers arc, blindsided many of us with its pinpoint-accurate depictions of the clothes, music, and attitudes we embraced growing up. From the tragic growing-out perm, to the ‘curtains’ Loaded lad hair, to the glass-brick loo walls and horrific coked-up mega-restaurants of the ‘90s.

Just watching the scene where Dexter is attaining toe-curling levels of dick-ishness shot me back to an evening at The Atlantic bar with braying media types. And the stolen Quaglinos ashtray that lived on my kitchen shelf for years.

The exquisite melancholy of the past

After that briskly refreshing plunge into the past, I went to see All of Us Strangers, a deeply melancholic film about isolation and loneliness. It sees a middle-aged Andrew Scott suddenly able to visit the ghosts of his parents who died in 1987. A world of patterned acrylic jumpers, Harvest-ware toasters, unquestioned indoor smoking, and Top of the Pops on the boxy living room telly.

Not only was it a devastatingly sad film, it also triggered a tsunami of memories of what most suburban kitchens looked like before ‘lifestyle’ got involved. And how back then, dads were not only permitted but encouraged to keep emotions to themselves. Nobody in my family ever said, “love you,” or “to the moon and back.” It was just assumed that you loved each other, and you’d simply get on with arguing about homework and staying up to watch Juliet Bravo.

The midlife nostalgia-fest was completed with the recent news that The Body Shop has gone into liquidation. My entire timeline filled with fond images of dewberry oil, ice blue shampoo and fuzzy peach perfume, as if a Laura Ashley washbag had exploded all over it.

As a result, I’ve been thinking heavily about nostalgia...

...nostalgia isn’t necessarily bad, as long as we don’t end up dwelling in an imagined past for too long. Thinking of happy memories can help put current troubles into perspective, says Kaur. “Nostalgia can evoke positive emotions; help with mood enhancement; and in some cases, be a tool for managing stress, as it allows you to ‘escape’ from your current reality.”

Although looking back, I’m not sure I truly want to escape to a time when TFI Friday was the biggest show on TV, Loaded was the best-selling mag, and ‘gay’ was a playground insult. One good thing about nostalgia – it’s a useful reminder that sometimes, the present isn’t all that bad.'

#Nostalgia #One Day #All of Us Strangers #Andrew Scott #Paul Mescal #David Nicholls #Netflix #Body Shop

3 notes · View notes

tuppencetrinkets · 2 years

Text

Sorted caps from seasons 1, 4, 5 & 7 of The Walking Dead.

Aaron - Ross Marquand - #5,400

Abraham - Michael Cudlitz - #6,900

Amy - Emma Bell - #2,600

Andrea - Laurie Holden - #11,600

Astrid - Brianna Venskus - #3,300

Beth - Emily Kinney - #12,600

Bob - Lawrence Gilliard, Jr. - #4,800

Carl - Chandler Riggs - #16,300

Carol - Melissa McBride - #28,000

Cyndie - Sydney Park - #2,100

Dale - Jeffrey DeMunn - #8,700

Daryl - Norman Reedus - #19,000

Dawn - Christine Woods - #2,600

Deanna - Tovah Feldshuh - #3,000

Dwight - Austin Amelio - #2,900

Eugene - Josh McDermitt - #13,100

Ezekiel - Khary Payton - #4,800

Gabriel - Seth Gilliam - #4,600

Glen - Steven Yeun - #19,000

Governor - David Morrissey - #9,400

Gregory - Xander Berkeley - #3,000

Hershel - Scott Wilson - #6,000

Jadis - Pollyana McIntosh - #1,800

Jenner - Noah Emmerich - #3,300

Jerry - Cooper Andrews - #900

Jesus - Tom Payne - #3,700

Jim - Andrew Rothenberg - #2,600

Joe - Jeff Kober - #1,600

Lily - Audrey Marie Anderson - #2,900

Lizzie - Brighton Sharbino - #5,000

Lori - Sarah Wayne Callies - #17,000

Maggie - Lauren Cohan - #17,000

Merl - Michael Rooker - #1,400

Michonne - Danai Gurira - #11,000

Mika - Kyla Kenedy - #5,000

Mitch - Kirk Acevedo - #1,100

Morgan - Lennie Michael James - #5,700

Negan - Jeffrey Dean Morgan - #14,100

Noah - Tyler James Williams - #2,500

Richard - Karl Makinen - #4,000

Rick - Andrew Lincoln - #69,000

Rosita - Christian Serratos - #10,000

Sasha - Sonequa Martin-Green - #16,500

Simon - steven Ogg - #2,500

Sophia - Madison Lintz - #1,300

Spencer - Austin Nichols - #3,000

Tara - Alanna Masterson - #15,000

T-Dog - IronE Singleton - #3,500

Tyreese - Chad Coleman - #8,800

This content is free for anyone to use or edit however you like; if you care to throw a dollar or two my way for time, effort, storage fees etc you are more than welcome to do so via my PAYPAL. Please like or reblog this post if you have found it useful or are downloading the content within. If you have any questions or you have any problems with the links or find any inconsistencies in the content, etc. please feel free to drop me a politely worded message via my ASKBOX ON MY RESOURCE BLOG (second icon from the top on my theme!)

89 notes · View notes

random-brushstrokes · 7 months

Text

Andrew Nicholl - A study, Indian Ocean (btw. 1844-66)

#Andrew Nicholl #irish art #seascape #1850s

128 notes · View notes

nyx-lyris · 2 years

Text

Cobra Kai (VERY LONG POST)

so... y’all are probably going to hate me for this post, but i’m tired of feeling like i have to stay silent or risk being bullied off social media just for my beliefs, so i’m just going to say it and endure the potential onslaught.

i have always had a bit of a problem with the way this fandom appears to view the show in general, and daniel in particular - especially relating to his relationships with the other characters (as well as other similar relationships among the younger characters). this is not to say i have a problem with people fantasizing and joking about the characters and their relationships - everybody is of course free to ship whoever they want, and it is certainly not my place to tell anyone what to (or not to) ship or fantasize about. anyway, i digress.

this fandom appears to view daniel as a female-coded character and see his story - as well as the entire karate kid/cobra kai franchise in general - as commentary on toxic masculinity. many also see the story as having a great many queer themes. as you may (or may not) have guessed, i do not entirely agree with these assessments of the story. i would like to preface the rest of my argument by saying that this is merely my interpretation of the movies/show and the above-mentioned issues, and i am not taking into account the creator’s or the actor’s comments on the story as i have not looked into much relating to that.

first, daniel as a female-coded character.

i have never seen daniel as a female-coded character. he is small and lean, making him appear weak to those around him - like he’s the runt of the bunch, if you will. he is underestimated because of this and because his style of karate is defense-oriented, as opposed to the more aggressive style of cobra kai. to an outside observer with no knowledge of the history of karate and its origins this appears rather strange, as most people associate fighting with aggression.

the only time i ever see him as anywhere near “female-coded” is in cobra kai season five during his scenes with terry silver. they have an abuser-victim relationship and many people have understandably linked this to toxic sexual male-female situations.

aside from that, i believe daniel is simply a different sort of masculine than say johnny lawrence or mike barnes. both of those men, as well as john kreese, are traditionally masculine - aggressive, dominant, blunt, and unafraid of getting their hands dirty, literally or figuratively.

daniel is much softer - not submissive, just more reserved and gentler than his counterparts. he is still very masculine - he is still a fighter, very much a knight in shining armor type of character, and he can put his foot down when he needs to. he simply prefers to use more peaceful methods to defuse and deal with situations whenever possible. his gentleness does not make him more feminine - in fact, truly masculine men know how to do both. true masculinity puts a brave face to the world and to those they love, and acts as a pillar for others to lean on. masculinity can be aggressive and blunt, but it can also be softer, as is the case with daniel larusso.

now to my next point: daniel larusso’s story being commentary on toxic masculinity.

this is where you guys are going to hate my guts.

i do not believe that daniel’s story is commentary on toxic masculinity because i do not believe that toxic masculinity exists. now, before you rip me to shreds, let me explain. i dislike the term toxic masculinity very much because it is extremely difficult to define - and from my observations many people simply associate traditional masculinity with toxic masculinity, implying that there is something inherently toxic about men who are more aggressive, dominant, etc.

i believe that toxicity exists. anyone can be toxic, though there are differences in the ways in which men and women are toxic due of course to inherent behavioral differences in the two sexes. men are typically very dominant and aggressive with their toxicity, while women are much slyer and more backhanded, typically becoming passive-aggressive with their attacks. traditional masculinity by itself is not a predeterminer for toxicity and to imply such is blatantly sexist.

case in point: johnny lawrence is a traditionally masculine man - however, he is not toxic. neither are any of his old friends. they have all made mistakes in their lives and the mantra of “no mercy” definitely made things harder for them as they got older. however, it was not the aggression and the toughness that they learned from cobra kai that was toxic - it was the no mercy aspect of the training, the idea that mercy is for the weak, the lack of nobility.

we see this in how johnny teaches cobra kai verses how john kreese teaches cobra kai. johnny actually emphasizes fair play, while still reinforcing traditionally masculine traits such as aggression and dominance. kreese on the other hand teaches them to be merciless and without nobility, acting as if there is no difference between showing mercy and backing out of a fight out of cowardice. kreese, too, is a traditionally masculine man, but it is not these aspects that make him toxic - it is his ruthless and manipulative tactics that make him toxic. he is traditionally masculine and as such these traits show themselves as he is acting toxic, but they are not what makes him toxic.

traditionally masculine traits are not what makes any man toxic. this difference is key, and it is this difference that cobra kai is attempting to convey - that one can be traditionally masculine and not be a ruthless, manipulative asshole. put more simply, masculinity is not the problem or a contributor to the problem - toxicity and a lack of properly dealing with trauma is.

how does this relate to daniel? well, many have naturally compared the methods of cobra kai to daniel’s miyagi-do methods, as well as the fact that he is generally smaller and apparently weaker than his opponents. this toxic-masculinity-narrative viewpoint partly stems from the idea that daniel is a female-coded character which, as i said earlier, he is not in most scenarios.

and finally, my third point: the supposed queer themes in cobra kai.

if you guys didn’t hate me for the last point, you’re definitely going to hate me for this one.

there are no queer themes in cobra kai - at least none that i can see. i have seen many people attempt to take situations in both the movies and the show and interpret them as queer-coded but when i actually go back and watch the scenes, i don’t get the same message. i have come to the conclusion that many people are letting their own fascination with sexuality, gender, and identity overrule their rational mind when watching different elements of the franchise and simply see what they want to see between the characters.

i would like to again emphasize that i am not in any way saying you can’t have fun with the characters and their relationships on the show or in the movies - obviously i have no authority over what you do (nor would i want to) and i think people should be able to ship whatever they want. hell, i have plenty of my own gay ships - i have no issue with that. i simply have an issue with people saying that those relationships are there on the show - or could be there - but the writers are simply too cowardly to let them become a reality. the truth is the writers aren’t putting them in there because that does not logically follow the story and is, despite popular belief, not in line with the characters’ personalities and previous actions.

i will address the ships with daniel first - johnny, chozen, mike and terry silver, in particular.

johnny, chozen, and mike all used to be daniel’s enemies. we haven’t seen as much of mike yet, but both johnny and chozen have done complete 180s with regard to daniel, now defending him instead of fighting against him. they are dedicated to him. they care about him. they have deep bonds and shared trauma, relationships that, though only recently rekindled, go back years. yes, this can be construed as johnny and chozen having closeted romantic feelings for daniel.

but what this also looks like - and what the show has been trying to emphasize this entire time - is brotherhood. they went from being staunch enemies to being brothers, to being family. and family is loyal to each other, family cares about each other, family crosses oceans and takes beatings for each other. this is not exclusive to romantic relationships.

now to daniel and terry. contrary to what i’ve seen some people mention in their posts, there was never any sexual tension between daniel and terry in the karate kid III. only die-hard simps of terry silver would ever say such a thing, and they are the only ones who can truly fantasize about them as a faithful and loving couple. personally, i believe people who ship them have some problems they probably need to sort out with a therapist, but what do i know. yes, i am shaming this ship - if you can ship it, i can criticize it.

anyway, i digress. daniel and terry have an abuser-victim relationship. and, though there are references to terry as a sexual predator on the show, in the movies daniel was a barely an adult when terry came into his life, making their relationship mirror more that of a child abuse situation than an abusive romantic relationship. in the show, as i said, they have given their relationship a bit more of a sexual tinge, but it is still not the primary focus of their connection. the point is that terry is an abuser and daniel is the victim - and terry, like any abuser, is working his way back into daniel’s life, grabbing onto his mind, bashing in his heart, and not letting go.

terry and daniel’s relationship in the show is honestly the closest thing i can find to queer-coding in the franchise - and honestly, it’s barely that.

now i will move on to the kid’s relationships - particularly sam and tory, both as individuals and as a couple.

samantha is a disney princess, and i mean that in the best way possible. she is loving and caring, but a feisty go-getter - she’s got a smile that could light up the room, but a fury that would make even the bravest of men tremble. she has also never shown any evidence in the show of being anything other than straight.

tory is the posterchild for lesbian characters. she’s fierce, she’s tough, she’s a fighter, and she doesn’t take shit from anyone. she’s the archetypical warrior lesbian character - and of course sam is the perfect opposite to her, the archetypical little spot of sunshine to offset tory. except, tory is also straight - she outright rejected the one advance from a girl she got on the show and, though it’s a small moment, i believe it shows that she isn’t even remotely interested in that. (as a small aside, i am honestly grateful the show didn’t take the lesbian route with her. as i said she is the posterchild for that type of character, and they easily could have done that - but they didn’t. and i am so relieved because it is such an overused trope.)

sam and tory’s relationship mirrors that of daniel’s relationship with his ex-rivals. tory has caused sam a great deal of trauma and pain, sam is aggressively opposed to tory being anywhere near her, but eventually tory redeems herself and comes to the right side (though we haven’t actually gotten an apology scene yet, as tory’s joining of the miyagi-fangs is still new) and sam begins to soften towards her.

people like the enemies-to-lovers trope and i completely understand that - but there is no objective implication of this sort of chemistry between them on the show. this goes for both sam and tory, and the daniel x ex-rival ships listed earlier.

to conclude...

this story is much more realistic and down to earth than most of what hollywood has been releasing up to this point - it’s not posturing and virtue signaling every five minutes; it’s not placing “diverse” characters in the plot for the sake of diversity alone; and it addresses issues that are relevant to all people no matter what boxes they may or may not check. it’s a show that tries to appeal generally to everyone - giving us characters that are defined by who they are rather than what they are; giving us a plot that makes sense and is (mostly) in keeping with its own rules and logic; and graciously not lecturing its audience about their supposed prejudices, rubbing things in our faces that at the end of the day do nothing for the story and simply make the audience feel like garbage.

daniel is not female-coded but instead expresses masculinity differently than johnny does; the story is not a commentary on toxic masculinity because it can’t be a commentary on something that does not exist in the first place; and the queer themes people claim to see are more a result of certain audience members’ own fascination with the subject of sexuality, gender, and identity.

this show is much better than a lot of people on tumblr will give it credit for and i find it very sad that most people on this site can’t look at anything without somehow applying identity politics to it and judging it based on how much the creators include or don’t include said identity politics in the media they are consuming. there is more to media than the superficiality of identity. not every piece of media needs to be filled with and catered to leftist ideology.

put simply: entertainment is not required to be political.

i rest my case.

53 notes · View notes