if youre gonna claim that youre gay youre gonna have to… make love in gay style. most of these kids just arent going to make it
9 notes
·
View notes
learning a few Spanish phrases with Pokémon ✨
470 notes
·
View notes
The Ones That Got Away (Touchstarved OC Rewrite)
I changed the lyrics to “The One That Got Away” by Katy Perry (I listened to this cover by Brielle Von Hugel), based on my Hound!MC Alon's backstory and their childhood friend's betrayal.
Summer in the city where we grew up.
Running from our troubles and tryin’ our luck,
Searching for a world that’d be big enough for two.
Used to steal Headmaster’s liquor and climb to the roof.
Dreamed about the future like we had a clue.
Never thought that one day, I'd be losing you.
In another life, I’d still be your friend.
We'd keep all those promises, be us until the end.
In another life, you would make me stay,
So I don't have to say you were the one that got away,
The one that got away.
One night on that rooftop, we’d made our pact
To leave these walls together, have each other’s backs.
Sometimes when I miss you, I climb towards the sky.
Summer kept on passing, and we grew up,
Found something in the city much bigger than us.
It’s time to face the music, we had long run out of luck.
But in another life, you’d be by my side.
We'd keep all those promises to take charge of our lives.
In another life, I would fight to stay,
So I don't have to say you were the one that got away,
The one that got away.
The one that got away.
All that money won’t buy back our time for me.
Can't replace you with a million dreams.
I never thought you’d turn our dream on me.
So I guess this is goodbye.
But in another life, I could still believe
That friends would keep their promises…
In another life, we’d make our escape,
And everyone who stayed would say we were the ones that got away.
The ones that got away…
In another life, I would make you stay
So I don't have to say you were the one that got away.
The one that got away…
9 notes
·
View notes
I feel like such a broken fucking person lol
I talked way too much in the tags don't read them
4 notes
·
View notes
this has the potential to sound extremely convoluted but i don't think dark and daisuke can be separated outside of messing with their dreams. two things first: dark remains both daisuke's literal and metaphorical dream, and dark himself has described the worlds inside of the artworks that he can move and bring daisuke into and out of also as dream(world)s.
what gets me is the way that dark and daisuke have been forcefully separated a few times before, but there's absolutely nothing showing how they unify again aside from daisuke being capable of drawing dark right back out from within himself in the real world or insanely quick transition cuts - i mean things like dark standing around or being in completely different areas to suddenly dwelling within daisuke again as soon as daisuke leaves the art's world. that being said it would make a lot of sense that without its true 'host' dark (as a dream) wouldn't actually be able to last very long or would be missing a lot of core human functions even while being the sole one in control of daisuke's body in the normal world. meanwhile, within an artwork, daisuke is the one that can't last very long by himself. (a la rokuto arc, a human being can't be left to dream forever; they've got to live.)
i feel like there's smth to be said about towa and baku's arcs too- with dark and daisuke trading so much of themselves; dark living daisuke's ordinary life as 'his' dream, which turns out to be daisuke's very own instead, or daisuke losing control of his form and turning into dark even within baku's nightmares, despite the fact he's still supposed to be completely, utterly 'separated' from dark and couldn't properly hear dark's voice anymore. dark's dependency and impatience in regards to daisuke and daisuke's calling for/searching for him is also pretty telling. even when they're 'separated', dark is always still there and can be drawn out from daisuke so long as daisuke himself is willing to call and reach out for dark. <- way more difficult than it actually seems for daisuke, who's often lying to himself and has major insecurity issues esp in regards to 'being dark.'
anyways. the only real relevance this would have to anything rp related is in regards to separating them. something like an exorcism probably wouldn't work because dark isn't... actually a ghost. metaphorically he's a legacy inherited and an ambition that daisuke wants to be able to find confidence in and meet. literally, dark is an artwork; magic and a dream that's been laser-engraved into daisuke's very own blood and DNA. it's as strenuous to try to completely remove him or 'cure' daisuke as it is to remove the fact he is, and has been raised as a thief for his entire life from him.
5 notes
·
View notes
Song of the Day: February 26
“Diamonds in the Mud” by Gerry Cinnamon
2 notes
·
View notes
OC SPEECH MANNERISMS.
i was tagged by @indorilnerevarine @nuclearstorms @liurnia @morvaris and @swordcoasts thank you so much beloveds, ily!!!
tagging: i feel like this already made the rounds so i’m tagging whoever wants to do this <3
BASICS
NO. OF SPOKEN LANGUAGES >> 1 / 2 / 3+ (english, french, spanish, sign language + can understand a bit of italian since she can speak spanish)
TONE OF VOICE >> high / average / deep
ACCENT >> yes / no
DEMEANOR >> confident / shy / approachable / hostile / other (polite, stoic)
POSTURE >> slumped / straight / stiff / relaxed
HABITS
head tilting / swaying / fidgeting / stuttering / gesturing / arm crossing / strokes chin / er, um, or other interjections / plays with hair or clothing / hands at hips / inconsistent eye contact / maintains eye contact / frequent pausing / stands close / stands at a distance
COMPLEXITY
VOCABULARY >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚪️⚪️
EMOTION >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚫️⚪️
SENTENCE STRUCTURE >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚪️⚪️
PROFANITY
FREQUENCY >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚫️⚫️
CREATIVITY (in regards to profanity) >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚪️⚪️
BOLD THAT APPLY
arse / ass / asshole / bastard / bitch / bloody / bugger / bollocks / chicken shit / crap / cunt / dick / frick / fuck / horseshit / motherfucker / piss / prick / pussy / screw / shit / shitass / son of a bitch / twat / wanker
THIS OR THAT
straightforward or cryptic? / finding the right word or using the first word that comes to mind? / masculinity, neutrality, or femininity? / formalities or with abrasiveness? / praise or equivocation? / frankness or lies? / excessive or minimal hand gestures? / name-calling or magnanimity? / friendly or blunt?
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS
DO PEOPLE HAVE A HARD TIME HEARING OR UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHARACTER? almost always / frequently / rarely / never
DOES YOUR CHARACTER’S POINT COME ACROSS EASILY WHEN THEY SPEAK? almost always / frequently / sometimes / rarely / never
WOULD YOUR CHARACTER INITIATE CONVERSATIONS? almost always / frequently / sometimes / never
WOULD YOUR CHARACTER BE THE ONE TO END CONVERSATIONS? almost always / frequently / sometimes / rarely / never
WOULD YOUR CHARACTER USE ‘WHOM’ IN A SENTENCE? yes / no / only ironically
YOUR CHARACTER WANTS TO MAKE A COUNTERPOINT. WHAT WORD DO THEY USE? but / though / although / however / perhaps / maybe
HOW DOES YOUR CHARACTER END CONVERSATIONS? walk away / ask if that’s everything / say that’s everything / give a proper goodbye / tell their company they're done here / remain quiet / they don’t
WHAT SOCIAL CLASS WOULD OTHERS ASSUME YOUR CHARACTER BELONGS TO, HEARING THEM SPEAK? upper / middle / lower
IN WHAT WAYS DOES THE WAY YOUR CHARACTER SPEAK STAND OUT TO OTHERS? accent / vocabulary / tone / level / politeness / brusqueness / it doesn’t
BASICS
NO. OF SPOKEN LANGUAGES >> 1 / 2 / 3+ (italian as mother tongue, english + can understand spanish and even say a few lines)
TONE OF VOICE >> high / average / deep
ACCENT >> yes / no
DEMEANOR >> confident / shy / approachable / hostile / other (polite, stoic) + way too smug for his own good
POSTURE >> slumped / straight / stiff / relaxed
HABITS
head tilting / swaying / fidgeting / stuttering / gesturing / arm crossing / strokes chin / er, um, or other interjections / plays with hair or clothing / hands at hips / inconsistent eye contact / maintains eye contact / frequent pausing / stands close / stands at a distance
COMPLEXITY
VOCABULARY >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚫️⚪️
EMOTION >> ⚫️⚫️⚪️⚪️⚪️
SENTENCE STRUCTURE >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚪️⚪️
PROFANITY
FREQUENCY >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚫️⚪️
CREATIVITY (in regards to profanity) >> ⚫️⚫️⚫️⚫️⚫️
BOLD THAT APPLY
arse / ass / asshole / bastard / bitch / bloody / bugger / bollocks / chicken shit / crap / cunt / dick / frick / fuck / horseshit / motherfucker / piss / prick / pussy / screw / shit / shitass / son of a bitch / twat / wanker
THIS OR THAT
straightforward or cryptic? / finding the right word (just to say something wrong to piss off someone lmao) or using the first word that comes to mind? / masculinity, neutrality, or femininity? / formalities or with abrasiveness? / praise or equivocation? / frankness or lies? / excessive or minimal hand gestures? / name-calling or magnanimity? / friendly or blunt?
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS
DO PEOPLE HAVE A HARD TIME HEARING OR UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHARACTER? almost always / frequently (sometimes he expresses himself with italian sayings translated in english that...ofc don’t make much sense to anyone that doesn’t know about them) / rarely / never
DOES YOUR CHARACTER’S POINT COME ACROSS EASILY WHEN THEY SPEAK? almost always / frequently (but with same problem as above sometimes) / sometimes / rarely / never
WOULD YOUR CHARACTER INITIATE CONVERSATIONS? almost always / frequently / sometimes / never
WOULD YOUR CHARACTER BE THE ONE TO END CONVERSATIONS? almost always / frequently / sometimes / rarely / never
WOULD YOUR CHARACTER USE ‘WHOM’ IN A SENTENCE? yes / no / only ironically
YOUR CHARACTER WANTS TO MAKE A COUNTERPOINT. WHAT WORD DO THEY USE? but / though / although / however / perhaps / maybe
HOW DOES YOUR CHARACTER END CONVERSATIONS? walk away / ask if that’s everything / say that’s everything / give a proper goodbye / tell their company they're done here / remain quiet / they don’t
WHAT SOCIAL CLASS WOULD OTHERS ASSUME YOUR CHARACTER BELONGS TO, HEARING THEM SPEAK? upper / middle / lower
IN WHAT WAYS DOES THE WAY YOUR CHARACTER SPEAK STAND OUT TO OTHERS? accent / vocabulary / tone / level / politeness / brusqueness / it doesn’t + rudeness sometimes
14 notes
·
View notes
I'm going to start sobbing
3 notes
·
View notes
new relationship status: unofficially in a unlabeled platonic partnership with my best friend
3 notes
·
View notes
I want my boyfriend's friends to like me so bad but I am so nervous around them like a horse
6 notes
·
View notes
I used to work for a trade book reviewer where I got paid to review people's books, and one of the rules of that review company is one that I think is just super useful to media analysis as a whole, and that is, we were told never to critique media for what it didn't do but only for what it did.
So, for instance, I couldn't say "this book didn't give its characters strong agency or goals". I instead had to say, "the characters in this book acted in ways that often felt misaligned with their characterization as if they were being pulled by the plot."
I think this is really important because a lot of "critiques" people give, if subverted to address what the book does instead of what it doesn't do, actually read pretty nonsensical. For instance, "none of the characters were unique" becomes "all of the characters read like other characters that exist in other media", which like... okay? That's not really a critique. It's just how fiction works. Or "none of the characters were likeable" becomes "all of the characters, at some point or another, did things that I found disagreeable or annoying" which is literally how every book works?
It also keeps you from holding a book to a standard it never sought to meet. "The world building in this book simply wasn't complex enough" becomes "The world building in this book was very simple", which, yes, good, that can actually be a good thing. Many books aspire to this. It's not actually a negative critique. Or "The stakes weren't very high and the climax didn't really offer any major plot twists or turns" becomes "The stakes were low and and the ending was quite predictable", which, if this is a cute romcom is exactly what I'm looking for.
Not to mention, I think this really helps to deconstruct a lot of the biases we carry into fiction. Characters not having strong agency isn't inherently bad. Characters who react to their surroundings can make a good story, so saying "the characters didn't have enough agency" is kind of weak, but when you flip it to say "the characters acted misaligned from their characterization" we can now see that the *real* problem here isn't that they lacked agency but that this lack of agency is inconsistent with the type of character that they are. a character this strong-willed *should* have more agency even if a weak-willed character might not.
So it's just a really simple way of framing the way I critique books that I think has really helped to show the difference between "this book is bad" and "this book didn't meet my personal preferences", but also, as someone talking about books, I think it helps give other people a clearer idea of what the book actually looks like so they can decide for themselves if it's worth their time.
Update: This is literally just a thought exercise to help you be more intentional with how you critique media. I'm not enforcing this as some divine rule that must be followed any time you have an opinion on fiction, and I'm definitely not saying that you have to structure every single sentence in a review to contain zero negative phrases. I'm just saying that I repurposed a rule we had at that specific reviewer to be a helpful tool to check myself when writing critiques now. If you don't want to use the tool, literally no one (especially not me) can or wants to force you to use it. As with all advice, it is a totally reasonable and normal thing to not have use for every piece of it that exists from random strangers on the internet. Use it to whatever extent it helps you or not at all.
44K notes
·
View notes
autistic expression in a neurotypical art gallery
this morning i thought i would talk about AUTHOR VOICE specifically when it comes to AUTISM. as autistic author i have learned to turn the dial up and down when writing characters. rose from CAMP DAMASCUS is basically exactly where i rest on spectrum and this shows in a few ways
in roses internal monolog you will see that she uses phrases like ‘my friend’ to talk about folks where neurotypical buckaroos might just use first name. or with her parents she will think of them in FIRST NAME instead of ‘mom’ or 'dad’. this is way many autistic buds THINK
to explain this trot I will say it is not a way of disrespect or anything like that, it is simply that these terms are TECHNICALLY all correct and interchangeable. socially, autistic buds often learn to mask by pinpointing WHEN to use these words that logically the same to us.
in CAMP DAMASCUS i left these things in to create character, but if you go back in my writing you will see it. in TINGLERS this is because they are honest in PUNK ROCK way. unfiltered expressions. in earlier novels its admittedly just because i did not realize it was unusual yet
point is, ROSES internal dialog in camp damascus is neurodivergent and i CHOSE not to change her thought process in this way, because we are BOTH autistic. this can be a risk because some neurotypical buckaroos will read it and just think ‘what a strange way. this is bad writing’
camp damascus reviews are actually very good it is a very well received book by any measure, but you will see some folks kind of making fun of these traits (i do not think they would do this if they knew it was authentic autistic way BUT we cannot educate EVERYONE on this trot)
POINT IS i am now faced with an artistic choice in later books. do i write with my AUTISTIC voice even though some neurotypical readers find it awkward? in technical sense some readers WILL think each book is better if i eliminate my autistic tendencies in later edits
my advice is this: character voice IS SO IMPORTANT, but a big part of writing is finding the place between YOUR voice and your CHARACTER voice where both are authentically existing in some way. like acting, you are always bringing something of yourself even when you 'disappear'
when writing BURY YOUR GAYS i did not plan to make misha on the spectrum, but misha is part of me and i am on the spectrum. what i have realized over time is that ALL OF MY CHARACTERS will have these traits in some way because i wrote them, and i will never disappear completely
so when edits came for BURY YOUR GAYS and misha, i took that dial and i turned it farther towards neurotypical than i did with rose, BUT I DID NOT TURN IT OFF COMPLETELY. in literal sense, i left some of those ‘my friends’, because i will always bring MY VOICE to my art as well
i am proud of being on the spectrum. while my voice may not hit every convention of ‘good writing’ it is authentically ‘MY writing’ and i think that is more important than any outside checklist for ‘correct literary expression’. and guess what THE RESULTS ARE IN, MY BOOKS DO WELL
so if you are an artist getting feedback or reviews, consider which parts you can LEARN FROM and grow and change, and which parts are just AUTHENTICALLY YOU. because while your honesty may defy conventions and seem unusual to some folks, IT IS OFTEN WHAT MAKES YOUR ART SING
feel free to turn that dial marked 'YOUR TRUE VOICE' up and down when it makes sense. i do this all the time. but i have long since decided i will never turn that dial OFF completely. your voice is your POWER buckaroo, dont be afraid to sing with it
2K notes
·
View notes
Good Omens S2 Episode 6 confession scene speculation:
Aziraphale didn't respond to the love confession from Crowley because he didn't realise it was one until Crowley mentioned the Nightingale and kissed him.
Allow me to explain.
---
Aziraphale interrupted Crowley to give him the news from Metatron, so when Crowley starts his spiel:
"We've been together a long time, I could always rely on you...we're a group....we've spent our existence pretending we aren't...if Gabriel and Beelzebub can go off together then we can...we don't need heaven/hell they're toxic...you and me whatya say?"
Aziraphale interprets everything Crowley is saying as his rebuttal to the 'good news', not a separate declaration of his feelings.
What Aziraphale just told him shaped Crowley's confession, instead of finally telling Aziraphale how he feels about him, he's now backed into a corner and trying to change Aziraphales mind. Offering to run off with him as the alternative to the Metatron's offer.
The repetition of the phrase: "go off together" from the bandstand fight in season one feels very intentional here. It would be easy for Aziraphale to think 'this is just Crowley's response when the divine plan interferes, he always wants to run away'.
Aziraphale believes that he just needs to make Crowley understand the situation and opportunity that this is and everything will be alright:
"Come with me! To heaven, I can run it, you can be my second in command. We can make a difference!"
Crowley is looking defeated already, in his mind he's bared his soul and Aziraphale is a brick wall. So if he can't tempt the angel into staying with the love he has for him (which Crowley thinks he's declared but he really hasn't), he'll get him to change his mind by evoking something else he loves:
"You can't leave this bookshop."
Aziraphale scoffs fondly. 'Silly demon, you were just suggesting we run off together and abandon it only a moment ago!' He thinks Crowley is trying to 'work' him here and the old serpent might even be selflessly trying to spare the angel the loss of his beloved bookshop in order to restore Crowley and help the world, which would be just like him to be so covertly protective. So Aziraphale reassures him, a bookshop doesn't matter to him as much as Crowley and the world. It's just a collection of objects really. Humanity is more important. Crowley is far more important.
"Oh Crowley, nothing lasts forever."
Crowley is crushed. Nothing lasts forever. Not even the two of them. So he covers his sadness with his glasses, walls back up, and he tries to leave.
Aziraphale is baffled. He just reassured Crowley that he was alright with change if it means things could be better. Why is Crowley leaving? Is he worried that they won't spend time together anymore? That he won't have time for his friend as a supreme archangel?
"Crowley come back!....we can be together, angels!...I need you!"
Crowley can't even look at him in that moment. Why would Aziraphale say that? The two of them together only if he accepts heaven again? Conditional love? That's not fair. It hurts.
Aziraphale meanwhile is hurt by Crowley's turning away, his silence and a bit incensed at what he perceives as ingratitude. Aziraphale didn't really want to go back to heaven, but he'd do it if it meant Crowley could be happy and safe and Crowley doesn't seem to appreciate that:
"I don't think you understand what I'm offering you."
Crowley went through the fall. He asked the questions. Did his best to protect humanity and it has brought him nothing but suffering. He's well aware what's on offer. He's seen heavens cruelty and capriciousness firsthand and been burned by it repeatedly. How can Aziraphale choose them over him and still think everything will work out?
"I understand. I think I understand a whole lot better than you do."
Crowley loves Aziraphale's big foolish optimism and kind heart and he thinks it's the very thing taking the angel away from him. This isn't how it was supposed to go. It's all slipping away from him.
"Listen. You hear that?"
Aziraphale can't even keep up at this point.
This is what comes of thousands of years of 'not talking about it' and living under threat of holy retribution if they are discovered. They're talking past each other, having two different conversations. Obfuscation and code has become their communication medium by necessity and it's failing them.
It's frustrating Aziraphale that he can't get a grip on this conversation:
"I don't hear anything!"
And Crowley drops the bomb.
"That's the point. No Nightingale's."
Oh. Suddenly we're on the same page. You can see from Aziraphale's face that he understands to what Crowley's referring. The Nightingale in Berkely square. Angels dining at the Ritz...
"You idiot! We could have been... us."
Crowley's talking about the big unspoken thing between them. Their relationship, thousands of years of dancing around each other like binary stars gravitationally and inexorably drawn together over and over. The thing Aziraphale was beginning to be bold about, (dancing notwithstanding) before Metatron came along and distracted him.
And it seems to Aziraphale that gut-wrenchingly, Crowley is finally acknowledging their mutual love only to point out that it's gone. Lost. They could have finally been together, an us, but Aziraphale ruined it because he's an 'idiot'.
After being quietly in love with Crowley for years, for Aziraphale to have his offer to return to heaven together and his unspoken love rejected in one fell swoop is devastating.
Overcome, he begins to cry and turns away, not wanting Crowley to see how hurt he is.
Crowley for his part is desperate. He has to do something. Maybe Aziraphale doesn't understand what Crowley is offering him! One fabulous kiss and va-voom right?
In a final desperate act, he kisses Aziraphale. Tries for passionate. Tries to show him that he loves him and show him what they could be because his words clearly aren't working.
Aziraphale is shocked and angry. He wants to kiss Crowley of course. But not like this. Not as a taunt. Crowley just told him their chance is over so what else could this be but a final insult. A kiss to punish the angel. It's a cruelty he didn't believe Crowley capable of.
And despite how mean it is. It's also what Aziraphale has wanted for so long he can't help but melt into it for a brief moment. Allow himself to feel what it would have been like to be that close before losing it forever.
Then Crowley lets go and Aziraphale breaks away on a sob, feeling wounded. Hurt beyond words that Crowley would use his feelings against him like this, gutted to be losing the man he loves and not understanding why.
The worst part is that Aziraphale doesn't have it in him to hate Crowley, even if he thinks the kiss was a cruel gesture. He still loves him. So he gathers himself and does what Aziraphale does when someone hurts him.
He forgives.
"I forgive you."
I forgive you for rejecting my attempt to restore you and make you happy, I forgive you for rejecting God and heaven yet again, I forgive you for acknowledging our love and then rejecting it. I forgive you for kissing me, giving me a fleeting glimpse of what we could have been to each other. I love you and I forgive you all that.
Crowley is done. Breath knocked out of him on a last sigh. He tried. And the Angel forgave him yet again for something he never asked or wanted forgiveness for. He doesn't want to be penitent for loving Aziraphale. Shouldn't have to apologise or regret wanting them to be together.
"Don't bother."
Aziraphale looks surprised Crowley is leaving because he genuinely is. He can't understand how it's all gone so horribly wrong. He gasps, shocked and can't even call out to him to stop, come back.
He cries, touches his lips where Crowley had kissed him. Tries to gather himself and barely has 10 seconds before Metatron is back.
At the end of that scene:
Crowley thinks he confessed his love and Aziraphale chose heaven over him because he didn't want to stop being a demon.
Aziraphale thinks Crowley rejected heaven, then rejected Aziraphale and threw their love back in his face as a final unkindness.
Aziraphale leaves and goes to heaven anyway because in his mind he's already lost Crowley and there is nothing left to stay for. If he doesn't have Crowley he needs a new purpose and it's going to be saving the world. He'll convince himself of it. And he'll push that broken heart down and the pain will fade if he just smiles through it. It will be enough, to make heaven better. It has to be. Maybe if he proves that he can make a difference Crowley might see the error of his ways and speak to him again? Surely. Hopefully.
---
Both of them are hurt and confused and lost and oh dear hell I really feel for them.
1K notes
·
View notes
SPOILERS!!! REFERENCES AND EASTER EGGS IN F&C ep. 10: CHEERS
The finale!
Pawn Swan! This was another character who first appeared in Steve Wolfhard's post-finale loredump about the 1000+ world. I never expected to actually see him in the show.
Nuts how this is like the third time we've seen Simon's ass. I love how Shermy is just chilling and playing video games while GOLB lets this random old man take a turn at the wheel.
This establishing shot of Fionnaworld shows that it's very small. By the time it is restored at the end of the episode, this ominous white border is gone and there are more buildings, implying that it became a complete world.
I can't believe Gary was thirsting after Scarab in this situation.
There is a shop called Evergree Flowers; likely a reference to the episode Evergreen.
This shop window advertises that you can learn to kick bugs. Appropriately enough, Cake kicks Scarab through this shop window while in her Godzilla form.
The Betty statue has become GOLBetty.
It should be clear by this point that Casper and Nova are a parallel to Simon and Betty, with all of their decisions being made by Casper with little consideration for Nova due to their unbalanced power dynamic. This is why Simon realises that he should have been more considerate of Betty's dreams, rather than single-mindedly chasing the Enchiridion and the crown.
The credits confirm that genderswapped Ash is named Ashley. I wonder what happened to her after she fell into the void. Probably nothing good.
Poor Marshall never gets to finish his songs. Truly he is the genderswapped Marceline.
The name "GOLBetty" is now canon; Simon uses it in this scene.
I'm not sure what's happening to GOLBetty here. A loose thread to pick up if this story ever gets a continuation, perhaps.
Simon steps through several different universes, including all the ones we saw during this miniseries. I'm not sure what this world full of tiny bears is meant to be.
Some kind of industrial capitalist hell universe.
This is the Water Park Prank artstyle, implying that Water Park Prank takes place in a separate but canon universe. So Water Park Prank is now canonically canonical! (what a ridiculous phrase)
Some kind of Jake universe.
A universe featuring Magwood and his volcano lair, from the episode Evergreen.
The snail! It's not dead after all. And it's a great way of symbolising a return to regular Ooo, as is the reappearance of the smiley butterfly.
This was a strange selection of characters. I hope Jay hasn't left his younger siblings on their own if their dad is dead. At least baby Finn won't have to grow up in Vampworld, though part of me liked imagining what that would have been like.
Fionna mentions that his is her top fantasy. The other two of her top three fantasies were Cake being able to talk and a kingdom made of candy.
She gets a hammer, like she had in the dream sequence at the very beginning of the miniseries.
Kheirosiphon goes back to working in a teashop, just like he did on The Drift before he was imprisoned by Scarab. Also Marshall's outfit here is incredibly gay, it's great.
There is an ad here for a daddy issues themed comedy night. Sounds like Marceline's kind of place.
Prismo's face glitches for a second. Ominous.
Simon definitely needs to move out. This is probably an even more important realisation than coming to understand his influence over Betty.
In the credits of this episode, Simon is finally at peace.
And with that, the miniseries is over! Back to the long wait. Will this be it for Adventure Time? Or is there yet more to come...
1K notes
·
View notes
channelled my inner sundrop at work today btw
0 notes
I really hate the idea that likes are useless or don't tell you anything. they tell you somebody liked your post! you did good and somebody liked it so they gave it a like! the constant cries of "only reblogs actually Do something" feels very… hmm, how do I phrase this?
it's rooted in a sort of warning that tumblr functions differently than other sites in that the number of likes on a post doesn't necessarily contribute to an algorithm that pushes forward certain content (algorithms which, tbh, create a weird sort of feedback loop in which content that is already popular becomes even more popular by getting boosted on the merits of already being popular, but I digress), and so reblogging is the only way to actually spread a post. likes don't make a post "breach containment."
but if likes are equivalent to "positive emotional response" and reblogs are equivalent to "exposure," then discouraging likes in favor of reblogs is discouraging enjoyment of your post in favor of promotion of your post. okay... why? to what end? if the only "correct" mode of engagement is an expanding fractal web of reblogs, and the point of a reblog is only to beget further reblogs... what's the goal?
you've deemed the like as an expression of pleasure useless, so it's kind of difficult to argue that "reblogging a post means they enjoyed it more than if they'd just simply liked it." the quantity of pleasure expressed doesn't matter if you've already devalued the concept of "expressing pleasure and doing nothing else." you can't earnestly say "expressing pleasure is important to me but only if it's accompanied by exposure." so your goal isn't for more people to delight in your content; it's for more people to see your content, and for each of them then to make even more people see your content in turn. and so on. infinitely. just sharing. just exposure.
is that how we got to this point wherein people are genuinely writing essays about how liking a post is actually a backhanded passive-aggressive insult? you think I click the little red heart because I hate you? the logic is so contorted. it relies on the assumption that everyone around you is operating in bad faith, that everyone's intentions are bad until proven good.
what a bitter, paranoid way to live.
7K notes
·
View notes