at some point it's just like. do they even fucking like the thing they're asking AI to make? "oh we'll just use AI for all the scripts" "we'll just use AI for art" "no worries AI can write this book" "oh, AI could easily design this"
like... it's so clear they've never stood in the middle of an art museum and felt like crying, looking at a piece that somehow cuts into your marrow even though the artist and you are separated by space and time. they've never looked at a poem - once, twice, three times - just because the words feel like a fired gun, something too-close, clanging behind your eyes. they've never gotten to the end of the movie and had to arrive, blinking, back into their body, laughing a little because they were holding their breath without realizing.
"oh AI can mimic style" "AI can mimic emotion" "AI can mimic you and your job is almost gone, kid."
... how do i explain to you - you can make AI that does a perfect job of imitating me. you could disseminate it through the entire world and make so much money, using my works and my ideas and my everything.
and i'd still keep writing.
i don't know there's a word for it. in high school, we become aware that the way we feel about our artform is a cliche - it's like breathing. over and over, artists all feel the same thing. "i write because i need to" and "my music is how i speak" and "i make art because it's either that or i stop existing." it is such a common experience, the violence and immediacy we mean behind it is like breathing to me - comes out like a useless understatement. it's a cliche because we all feel it, not because the experience isn't actually persistent. so many of us have this ... fluttering urgency behind our ribs.
i'm not doing it for the money. for a star on the ground in some city i've never visited. i am doing it because when i was seven i started taking notebooks with me on walks. i am doing it because in second grade i wrote a poem and stood up in front of my whole class to read it out while i shook with nerves. i am doing it because i spent high school scribbling all my feelings down. i am doing it for the 16 year old me and the 18 year old me and the today-me, how we can never put the pen down. you can take me down to a subatomic layer, eviscerate me - and never find the source of it; it is of me. when i was 19 i named this blog inkskinned because i was dramatic and lonely and it felt like the only thing that was actually permanently-true about me was that this is what is inside of me, that the words come up over everything, coat everything, bloom their little twilight arias into every nook and corner and alley
"we're gonna replace you". that is okay. you think that i am writing to fill a space. that someone said JOB OPENING: Writer Needed, and i wrote to answer. you think one raindrop replaces another, and i think they're both just falling. you think art has a place, that is simply arrives on walls when it is needed, that is only ever on demand, perfect, easily requested. you see "audience spending" and "marketability" and "multi-line merch opportunity"
and i see a kid drowning. i am writing to make her a boat. i am writing because what used to be a river raft has long become a fully-rigged ship. i am writing because you can fucking rip this out of my cold dead clammy hands and i will still come back as a ghost and i will still be penning poems about it.
it isn't even love. the word we use the most i think is "passion". devotion, obsession, necessity. my favorite little fact about the magic of artists - "abracadabra" means i create as i speak. we make because it sluices out of us. because we look down and our hands are somehow already busy. because it was the first thing we knew and it is our backbone and heartbreak and everything. because we have given up well-paying jobs and a "real life" and the approval of our parents. we create because - the cliche again. it's like breathing. we create because we must.
you create because you're greedy.
18K notes
·
View notes
Seward's bone deep desire to run away from the asylum is not exactly surprising. There have been a lot of really good meta posts about how the return of Van Helsing into his life is the turning point where we see the caring and good side of him and how we can interpret his life as a student in Amersterdam as one of freedom and happiness. How he is part of the tragedy of manners, how strict social expectations allow Dracula to persist, and how they only exacerbate the unhappiness of the characters.
And I think the tragedy of Seward is that, really, he should not be the head of an asylum. It's a job that brings him no joy, and he's BAD at it. We can all recognize that if your first reaction to going back to work is "What if I just leave it all." That isn't a healthy work environment.
Now, in the modern day, the ability to pick and choose a work environment, even to leave one that is damaging your mental health, is a privilege. (IT SHOULDNT BE, but it is). And, although it is definitely reaching crisis levels in modern times, major changes in your career have almost always been difficult (unless you are really rich, or a particular brand of academic in the 17th-18th century, or both).
Seward can't just leave and become a surgeon. To give up the lofty position of "Head of an Asylum" would be unthinkable in the 1890s, especially for a reason like "Being here is basically turning me into the Joker." Like, how would Seward explain that in polite society? Would they accept that reasoning? Would they create salacious gossip if they didn't? Can Seward leave his position without losing a great amount of social capital?
Probably not.
His rise to head of an asylum, as many have pointed out, was meteoric, to say the least. It has afforded him status and respect and also left him deeply, deeply fucked up. And he can't leave!
I think his desperate attempts to quantify Renfield's behaviors into a new mental illness are telling in this regard. Maybe he is too used to having to meet some sort of expectation, and now he thinks this is the logical next step (It's NOT, but I digress). The feeling of having to keep performing above expectations, grasping at straws to do so, and subsequently burning oneself out (as well as others around you) and engaging in unethical practices? Idk. It sounds like something that would happen today. (tbh there are probably a ton of Sewards out there today, as there are still systemic problems within the mental health system that allow for the dehumanizing and abuse of patients).
It doesn't excuse his behavior. Nothing he does to Renfield is excusable, but I think it does explain some of the *why*. He isn't just cruel for cruelty's sake.
So, tldr I guess: I think reading Seward as someone who got stuck on a career path that he realized was unfufilling and that he ends up hating. Social conventions restrict him from just quitting without and a (socially acceptable) good reason to do so, and a lifetime of being regarded as one of the smartest people in the room means he can not allow himself to fail. Unfortunately, this also means he can not admit when his actions or his ideas are wrong when it comes to his job.
(But he can show that uncertainty FOR Lucy, and TO Arthur and Van Helsing, which speaks his trust and love for them)
711 notes
·
View notes
the doctor's dynamic with his companions is like the beating hearts of the show, yet for some reason the doctor is so tightlipped about his feelings for martha in particular. it's maddening. sure, the narrative will give us tiny moments of the doctor showing his appreciation of her and acknowledging her presence. martha jones i like you. martha jones you're a star. but what does he think about her? how does he view her? what is her significance to him?
we learn a lot about what martha thinks the doctor thinks about her. he's not seeing me he's just remembering. sometimes i think he likes me but sometimes i just think he needs someone. he doesn't even look at me but i don't care. it's never outright confirmed, but so many signs point to this being the case. the doctor is constantly putting up walls between the two of them, which martha tries so hard to break through. and there are times where it seems like she manages to, where the two of them have genuine moments of connection! only for the next episode to come along and destroy that progress, as if it never happened, and the doctor goes back to being distant and overlooking her.
this wouldn't be as big a deal as it is if there was some sort of comeuppance or catharsis at the end of s3. but in the final speech martha gives to the doctor before she goes, the focus is put on her unrequited love. again. the issue, rtd wants us to believe, is that the doctor doesn't reciprocate martha's romantic feelings for him. but that's not it. the real issue is that the doctor doesn't even treat martha as a proper person, a companion in her own right, a friend who he cherishes and wants to travel with because she's martha jones. instead, he acts as if she's just someone to keep around because he gets lonely on his own.
and so instead of the doctor rightly being called out for his callous treatment of martha, we just have the show brush this under the rug and act like the matter is resolved come s4. because at the end of the day, neither martha nor her relationship to the doctor matter. they never did to the show or its writers. they were just a vehicle to tell the true story, which has nothing to do with martha at all. (this is absolutely rooted in misogynoir btw.)
69 notes
·
View notes
Melisandre is one of my favorite minor POVs mostly because of how GRRM plays with the all-powerful mage trope. See the deconstruction with her is that despite her antics, she’s actually very powerful and all her visions are legit. It’s just that she absolutely sucks at interpreting said visions, mostly because she has all these preconceived notions and is very stubborn about them. And even when the answer is staring right at her (literally), she just doubles down. And it can be very frustrating as a reader, to be quite honest.
Like she’s been super gung ho about Stannis Baratheon being Azor Ahai/the Prince that Was Promised, though only R’hllor know why, to the extent that she will flat-out ignore any evidence to the contrary. Her visions in ADWD essentially scream that Azor Ahai is someone different (not Stannis!) but good ol’ Mel just won’t budge.
There’s this very hilarious interaction in Jon’s 10th ADWD chapter that essentially spells out all of her problems with visions and prophecy, with Jon serving as the reader’s proxy in some ways.
This interaction happens during Alys Karstark’s wedding feast and Patchface drops some of his weird jingles, which Mel very unsettled by. So she’s turns to Jon and is like, “ugh that dude is so creepy, all my visions tell me so”. And Jon’s reaction to this is super funny, because he’s like:
“You see fools in your fire, but no hint of Stannis?”
Wow Jon lmao
He just had to call her out like that, unprovoked. But his frustration makes sense. He’s constantly been asking about Stannis’ whereabouts but Mel’s responses just aren’t very satisfactory (in his opinion).
Then we get this next line which really just says everything about Mel’s stubbornness and perfectly embodies the deconstruction of the all-powerful seer trope.
“When I search for him all I see is snow.”
So Mel looks for Stannis, whom she believes to be Azor Ahai, in her fires but doesn’t find him. Instead she sees “snow”. And this part tracks with her POV too. We know from her chapter that she constantly sees Jon in her visions. It’s how we get the very interesting “I pray for a glimpse of Azor Ahai, and R’hllor shows me only Snow” line.
So one would think that Mel might go: “Hmmm I look for the prophesied savior, but I don’t see Stannis. Instead, I only see Snow. I don’t doubt R’hllor’s power so if my visions are true, then maybe I need to rethink a few things”.
One would think…
But nope!
And Jon’s like “Hey maybe you’re not seeing Stannis because he’s super dead, ever think about that Mel?” And she proceeds to spout the usual Azor Ahai stuff and even mentions Dragonstone:
“When the red star bleeds and the darkness gathers, Azor Ahai shall be born again amidst smoke and salt to wake dragons out of stone. Dragonstone is the place of smoke and salt.”
To which Jon’s replies, “uhhhh news flash Stannis was not born on Dragonstone so that doesn’t track”.
Obviously this is Jon’s skepticism but I like to think that he took the reader’s place here. Because many of us have asked ourselves, why oh why would Mel think of Stannis just because she saw Dragonstone? Like yeah, he’s the Lord of Dragonstone but he wasn’t born there. It’s quite a valid question and how does Mel counter it? She doubles down and twist herself into a pretzel to make Stannis fit (even though he doesn’t fit at all!)
Really, Jon’s reaction is essentially what would happen if someone dropped me into the world of ASOIAF and gave me the chance to meet Mel and ask her a few questions. I’d be quite frustrated, just as Jon is here. And to be fair, the reader has a lot of auxiliary information (e.g., Jon’s parentage) that Mel doesn’t have.
But then the next few lines really illustrate just why poor Mel can be so frustrating. Because Jon’s follow up is,
“And what of Mance? Is he lost as well? What do your fires show?”
And what does Mel say?
“The same, I fear. Only snow.”
…??!
Mel!😭
Seriously, I cannot! This is the exact same situation as with Stannis. She looks for a king but only sees Snow. This makes me wonder then, based on previous wording, if she’s specifically looking for “the King Beyond the Wall” (not just “Mance”) and only seeing Snow - at this point, Jon has all but supplanted Mance.
So once again, one would think that Mel would go: hmmmm I look for the King Beyond the Wall but I see Jon Snow and not Mance Rayder. Seeing that Mance’s power has been diminished and Jon Snow is now taking control of the wildlings, maybe I should re-evaluate a few things”.
Yeah, one would think…
Homegirl is trying her best, she really is. But sadly, her best can only get E for Effort.
And at this point the reader is just done with Mel, and Jon is too:
“You are seeing cinders dancing in the updraft.”
He doesn’t even bother to phase it as a question lmao. He just calls her out and doesn’t care.
And we’re in his POV so he’s thinking of the lower case “snow”. Also, why in the hell is Mel referring to Jon like this?
Anyway, this is why I think Jon serves as the reader’s proxy in this conversation because it’s like a thinking exercise (facilitated by the narrative) that ultimately goes nowhere because Mel is so, so stubborn.
Because if we really break it down:
R’hllor/the Narrative: Who do you see when you search for the king/Azor Ahai?
Mel: Jon Snow
R’hllor/the Narrative: Ok…and who do you see when you search for the King Beyond the Wall?
Mel: Erm, Jon Snow…
R’hllor/the Narrative/the Reader: Great! So say it with me. The king you’re looking for is J-
Mel: STANNIS BARATHEON!
R’hllor/the Reader: …?!
And before anyone claims that this is a misdirect, Mel really is seeing Jon Snow. Straight from the horse’s mouth:
“I am seeing skulls. And you. I see your face every time I look into the flames.”
Friend….I don’t even know what to say anymore…
304 notes
·
View notes