wearing a t shirt that says 'A FOLK TRADITION CARRIED BY A SELECT FEW IS NO LONGER A FOLK TRADITION' and the back says 'TRADITION WITHOUT CHANGE IS SIMPLY REENACTMENT' and little shorts that say 'ABANDON YE SHAME HERE'
50 notes
·
View notes
the one thing i feel pretty certain about for this episode is that america will not decide the election. a decision will be made, a president will be elected, but america will not be the deciding factor.
succession can’t mimic 2016 or 2020 point blank, that would be boring and have nothing to say. it can’t try to outdo trump because it’ll go too whacky and fall flat like veep’s last season (sorry conheads, no way he’s winning). but what it CAN do is illustrate the immensely corrupt, often arbitrary, and hugely influential nature of news media and conglomerations on political processes. i think probably jimenez will be in the lead, then atn/waystar does something to, i don’t know, discount votes or cast suspicion on jimenez or call the election for mencken early, and the tide will shift, even though the votes are already in. the votes don’t actually matter. the actual result doesn’t actually matter. that’s the power logan (and as an extension, billionaires and CEOs in general) hold. shiv says it herself to logan in s4e2: “just cause you say it’s true doesn’t make it true. everyone just fucking agrees with you and believes you, so it becomes true and then you can turn around and say like, 'oh, you see? see? i was right.'” but it doesn’t matter that logan’s “a human fucking gaslight,” everything he says comes true anyways. not because he was right, but because that’s how it works. he says things and then they happen, regardless of what the truth is or what should actually come to pass. that’s been one of the key throughlines since the very first episode of the entire show when, in response to kendall calling logan out of touch because times are changing and logan isn't changing with them, logan hisses that everyone always says you’re wrong until you do it and prove you were right: “you make your own reality.” you can't miss the bus if you're the one driving it. the election, the votes, the political process? none of that matters. it was always going to come down to the roys and their ilk (allies or enemies, just the top 1%) — that was the whole point of “what it takes” (the mencken episode) last season, after all.
i’ve seen lots of theories about what america will choose and how the candidates will respond and all that and i just don’t think that’s the show’s focus; i think the whole point is to demonstrate the lack of agency, the illusion of democracy. because, i mean, we’ve already seen the fall of democracy via fascist election and fascist election-denial, both in real life and in the countless (usually mid) satires created afterwards. it would be disappointing to see succession use the election to reiterate that same point of 'ohhh alt-right ahhhhh!!!' i don’t think it’ll be about ‘fascism’ at all — at least, not ‘trump-y’ fascism. it’ll be about fascism in the broader sense, the kind that doesn't sport a KKK hood (even when it keeps one tucked away in the attic). it's the fascism that every single roy (very much including shiv and kendall) aid and abet -- the fascism that so many succession fans don't seem to regard as fascism, despite it quite literally being the definition of fascism. trump wasn’t the entrance of fascism into our political process. he wasn’t the lone sign of the failing of american democracy. democracy in america has long been illusory, trump just made it more blatantly evident with his particular brand of hate-speech-ridden masculinist in-your-face fascism.
so i think that’s what this episode will hopefully focus on — america will not decide. corporations, news media, and the roys will. thus, the president will most likely become president not because the country supports his policies the most, but because he’s likely to agree to help block a business deal for a major media empire, and the other candidate is unlikely to. and this will likely come to pass due to said major media empire's interference and influence: they create their own reality. they say it, and everyone agrees with them and believes them, so it becomes true.
202 notes
·
View notes
I have Gathered some Data
@skysofrey and I recently got into a discussion about names in OFMD. Specifically, how many times does Ed actually call Stede by his name in the show? We could only think of a few examples each and that didn't seem right. And because I'm insane, I decided to rewatch and note down every time a name was used, who used it, and who was being spoken to. Here are my findings!
Before you proceed, please know that this is strictly for fun and because I was curious. There are likely errors in the data (I'm sure I missed some things, I'm just one person.) but! I still think that what's been gathered is very interesting.
Here are some other fun/important/miserable things that I found in my travels:
There is one more time where Stede calls Ed “Edward,” and the only time it isn’t said to him directly. This is when Stede is addressing the petrified orange.
Of the five times that Stede is called “The Gentleman Pirate,” two of them are from Ed.
Ed calls Stede by his name only twelve times in the series. Only two of these instances are spoken to someone else. There are two others when Ed is looking for him at the pier, and therefore spoken to no one.
There are only ten instances of other characters calling Ed something other than his name or “Blackbeard.” Two of these are from Izzy, during the scene in Spanish Jackie’s bar, where he’s informing Stede that Ed would like to meet with him. During this scene, he only uses “my captain” and “my boss.” This is one of the very few times he doesn’t refer to Ed to other people as “Blackbeard” and it’s at the time that is arguably the most important. (He’s an idiot.)
Out of the twenty times that Ed refers to himself, fourteen of those are as “Blackbeard/The Kraken.” He refers to himself with names other than “Ed/Edward” 70% of the time. 50% of the times he refers to himself by his name are during the beach scene in episode nine, and there is only one instance where he uses his name that is not in Stede’s company. ("Actually, I do want to be called 'Ed' from now on.")
Izzy only refers to Ed as "Edward" to other people four times in the show. Two of those times are when he's marooning Stede's crew, and each time he uses his name in that scene, he takes on a mocking tone. Meaning that 50% of every instance he's referred to Ed as "Edward" to other people, he's been mocking his name.
Ed calls Stede "mate" as often as he calls him by his name, but he only calls him "mate" directly.
Stede calls Ed by his name only once more than Izzy does.
80% of the times Ed refers to himself by name happen in episode nine.
378 notes
·
View notes
Would Midnight be patient with my fellow discalculia girlies... I love her but am So So Pathologically Bad at math
Midnight teaches advanced algebra to cats, you'll be fine. She'll conjure up a fractal for you, color each part of the equation, show how each part interacts and what it looks like when you change it
She'll take you out to the beach and explain the wind and the tide, compare them to each axis on the formula she showed you, and modify one factor. The wind dies down and the sea becomes as smooth as glass.
"Smoothness for the-waves you-see?" She waits for you to nod, never rushing you along, even the most casual questions are genuine, "Excellent! For this is example of maths I-teach. Nature it-will-happen. Simpleness it-being. You-will-understand."
102 notes
·
View notes
word of advice: don't be an english major
17 notes
·
View notes
i think the jump from 'this is an annual tumblr holiday' to 'Only Tumblr People Know About This' regarding dracula daily is a lil funny. idk how to tell y'all that non-tumblr people are aware of this. it's not some obscure tumblr meme. the first person to tell me that dracula daily is starting again this year was my professor via an announcement to our entire class
87 notes
·
View notes
Okay, I've been thinking a lot about that whole thing with using the term "unreliable narrator" for Shen Yuan, and I want to throw in my two cents.
(looong explanation under the cut)
There are two layers to storytelling - narration and focalisation.
A narrator is the voice telling the story; it will usually be either a character inside the story (intradiegetic narrator) or a being outside of the story (extradiegetic narrator) who usually knows at least some of the things that the character/s are thinking or feeling.
Focalisation is about the being whose thoughts the narrator is conveying. A story written in the 1st person pov where a character is narrating their own life would have homodiegetic focalization. A 3rd person pov where the narrator is someone outside of the story would have heterodiegetic focalization. A story where the narrator's knowledge is unlimited has zero focalization.
What we have in SVSSS is a story narrated by a (seemingly) omniscient being, so an extradiegetic and heterodiegetic narrator. Thus, the narrator is someone outside the story, not SY, and calling him an unreliable narrator is wrong. Right?
No! SVSSS has internal focalization, meaning that the narration is focused on the thoughts and feelings of a character, in this case Shen Yuan. (As opposed to external focalization where the narration is limited to just the setting, what characters are doing, etc without delving into their thoughts).
What we read in the story are Shen Yuan's thoughts and feelings in the 3rd person. So far so good - nothing weird there. The trouble comes in the form of the fact that obviously, somewhere along the way, SY's actual thoughts/feelings get filtered/censored, so to speak, and we read a stripped down/edited version of them. This means that somewhere along the line, someone is unreliable. But we don't know who - maybe we are reading a straight up transcription of SY's thoughts and he is just that much more delusional than we thought. Maybe the narrator is leaving some things out, or isn't granted access to his "true" thoughts. It's impossible to tell.
The only thing we know for sure is that we are reading what we are meant to believe to be what SY sees happening/thinks about/feels. What we do not know is whether or not that is the objective truth.
So - even though Shen Yuan isn't the "narrator" by definition, it is still through his eyes that we see the events of SVSSS happening. There are no truly objective statements in SVSSS - it's all composed of Shen Yuan's thoughts, and who knows how much of the truth is lost to his mental gymnastics. As I said before, we don't know where exactly the unreliabilty comes from, but unless you want to have to write out this entire explanation every time and still not even have a definitive answer, let's just say that Shen Yuan is the unreliable one for simplicity's sake.
TL;DR it's fine to call Shen Yuan an "unreliable narrator" and to pull the "oh but he isn't narrating the story" is to pointlessly argue semantics. We all know what we mean by "unreliable narrator". it's not that deep. just laugh at the joke and move on. thanks for coming to my tedtalk
14 notes
·
View notes
so when IS your birthday? :0
I know right??? math is such a fun subject!!!
Open the tags if you dare
15 notes
·
View notes
“But you can’t just slam the subjectivity button forever or you never get anywhere. If we just sit here and go, ‘It’s whatever, man, it’s subjective, everything is freaking subjective, it’s just whatever you feel bro,’ I feel like that’s not honouring the reality of value and truth and beauty. You’re not sincerely committing to the best you’ve got to offer.”
—CJ the X
80 notes
·
View notes
TBH i kind of am into phonetics in a freak pervert way
12 notes
·
View notes
"comics rarely have objectively good writing and the nature of their syndicated publication format limits their ability to function as complete stories" vs. "some comics genuinely rival the clarity of purpose and quality of prose found in some of the most lauded classic texts"
89 notes
·
View notes
btw to filipino moots im gna be an arenean B) or iskolar ng bayan who knows!
11 notes
·
View notes
☕
The live action Scooby-Doo movies?
I did not see this ask until RIGHT now (first time on desktop since crab day, second time since Nov 5 2020 [which was DOUBLY experience since I got my phone taken the same day]) so I'm going to assume this ask got eaten on mobile because tumblr, HOWEVER you poked a bear with this ask anon (as I'm sure you knew when asking) SO without further ado: my Scooby Doo live action opinions
So when you say 'live action Scooby-Doo movies' I'm assuming you're talking about the James Gunn films, starting with Scooby-Doo (2002) followed by Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed, just due to like, generally popularity and also the fact that I have actually seen those films. However shoot another ask if you wanted me to include Curse of the Lake Monster in this (because I will if anyone cares and turn this into a live-action scooby dissertation, i'd just need to like. watch the movie first) But anyways where I'm going with this is that this post is about the Gunn movies aka the ones with SMG, Freddie Prinze Jr., Linda Cardellini, and ofc our #1 man, Matthew Lilliard.
Okay so my take on these movies is... complicated. I wouldn't say it's as complicated as my feelings towards SDMI, because I watched the live actions way less as a kid and generally care less about them, but still no matter how much shit I throw at these two movies there are parts that I generally like (even love) that stops me from totally condemning them wholesale. Like the fact that these movies are FUNNY! There's so many moments from this duology that are just beyond iconic "like, that's one of my favorite names!" the whole thing with Scooby in the dress at the airport, ET. CETERA (like I can go on!)
The Gunn movies are genuinely SO fun and I can 100% see and understand how they've stood so well in the public view as a representation of Scooby. HOWEVER, this is where you start to see my problems with them. For the general American, (because that is the audience I'm familiar with) ESPECIALLY millennials and younger, who happen to make up the majority of both people on this site AND people I talk about Scooby with in real life, these movies, and the elements they introduced as "quintessential scooby tropes" are the base of their understanding of the Scooby franchise, along with likely some miscellaneous WAY episodes and maybe SDMI.
Which is where I get pissed off. In the pushing of the narrative of "breaking away" from the Scooby norm, Gunn basically invents (aka totally makes up) an idea of what classic era Scooby was like, cementing an idea of classic Scooby into the public mind that is totally disingenuous and just straight up false. For example, in attempting to portray Daphne as having taken strides to be seen more seriously in solving mysteries and defending herself, it pushes the narrative that in the classic era she WASN'T taken seriously, and only existed as a damsel-in-distress prop of a character, which is just not true??? Like yes, Daphne is clumsy, that's a part of her character, and her friends (because, fun fact, the gang ARE friends) joke about it sometimes because that's what friends DO. Framing that in some kind of sexist "that's all she does" lens is just total bull, especially as gang members fall into secret passageways/get lost etc. in WAY ALL THE DAMN TIME because that's how the plot functions! Like are we calling Velma ditzy for losing her glasses every other episode? Of course not, and Fred falls into passageways all the time, not to MENTION Shaggy and Scooby and all they get up to. Also one last thing on the topic of Daphne, like this idea of her mystery solving skills not being respected by the gang is just so supremely bullshit it amazes me sometimes, especially when she was the LEADER (or leader adjacent) through pretty much all of her appearances in the 1980s [Not that James Gunn could look at '80s era Scooby without spitting on it, but I digress]
AND THIS IS JUST DAPHNE! Like the perceptions pushed towards Fred (and Velma, but mostly Fred) through these movies are just as bad! Like okay, with Fred---In these movies Fred is just an asshole. I hate Gunn Movies!Fred. I mean yeah he can be funny but it's almost always so mean! Almost nothing makes me madder than a mean Fred by the way. If he's putting other gang members down (even halfway, like with his whole "dorky chicks like you turn me on too" line, which... ew) then to me something has gone very, very, VERY, wrong in your basic understanding of Frederick Herman Jones as a character. Like he's the cheerleader! He puts himself in between his friends and danger! He loves nets, and traps, and Elvis impressions, and wrestling, and the trapeze, and cars, and most of all he LOVES sharing the things he loves with his friends! (Sometimes to a bit of an extreme. No one wants to hear about your net facts, Fred) And the live action movies just don't understand that at all. And I know there's maybe something to say I suppose in that some of those aspects of his characterization hadn't been "established yet" by the time "Scooby-Doo" came out in 2002. But it's there if you look. For Fred Jones, being the leader means being the caretaker, (he's the Mom friend what can I say) and any version where he's cruel and arrogant and just DOESN'T CARE about his friends in the way he's shown to in the Gunn movies is just so far from Fred to me it's not even funny. And what makes it even worse for me is that this (or at least something similar) is the idea of Fred that has really spread to the popular culture. Just the "leader", the jock that makes the rules, the one that [insert X adaptation here] finally gave a personality and made interesting (something that has been said more times than I can count for pretty much every gang member, save Shaggy and Scooby).
And I haven't even touched on Velma, and how they gave her a bit of a early 2000s smart superiority girl complex against Daphne, plus the whole makeover thing and etc. etc. The Gunn Movies are pretty much what would happen if you took someone who hadn't seen Scooby since they were 7 years old (and honestly had a pretty negative outlook against it then) and tried to "fix" it, only his memory was so bad he just made up problems (and threw in a good helping of early 2000s style sexism with it) convincing pretty much the entirety of the popular culture that said problems exist and that Gunn was absolutely brilliant for fixing them (and then bringing up said "problems" whenever anyone wants to talk about Scooby) and this entire rant has been without even fucking MENTIONING what is probably the reason you, anonymous tumblr user sent this ask in the first place, to I, Swishy "Scrappy Doo Redemption Arc" Broke-on-books (dot tumblr dot com), which is his HIGHLY SUCESSFUL and utterly sadistic character assassination of my number one man, Scrappy Doo.
And I am going to try my damnedest here not to get totally into my highly passionate opinions over what James Gunn did to Scrappy in the first of his Scooby movies and how thoroughly it has pissed me the fuck off because I have been writing this post for over an hour now and if we start to really get into my feelings on this topic it will certainly be a couple of hours more but like. That Fucking Bitch. I give James Gunn personally a solid eighty-five percent of the blame for making my life as a Scrappy Doo fan UTTERLY unbearable with this stupid fucking movie alone, and just his Scrappy crimes would honestly be enough for me to say that I hate this movie, not even considering the numerous Scooby crimes I've been talking about here for the past million paragraphs, but the part about this movie that makes me the MOST mad the most pissed off is that it's actually a good fucking movie. James Gunn wrote two hilarious and entertaining movies that have become beloved in the popular culture for their successes in that arena, while at the same time pissing all over the core themes and messages of the franchise of which it was based, that of friendship.
TLDR; The Live Action Scooby Doo movies (written by James Gunn) are highly entertaining and fun pieces of media to watch, and are widely loved by the general public and looked at with fondness and nostalgia because of that. However, as a hardcore Scooby Doo fan (writing that phrase sounds so ridiculous but oh well) the existence of these movies and their impact on the popular culture can be extremely frustrating (despite any personal nostalgia said fan may have) due to their spreading of a misinformed picture of what "typical Scooby Doo" looks like. This picture is especially frustrating due to the fabrication or exaggeration of problems present in classic Scooby (such as sexism in regards to the girls), as well as giving more ammunition to other problems in Scooby fandom (such as oversexualization, and sexualization in general, which no one wants to see in regards to their children's cartoons, like HONESTLY.) Discussions of sexism and sexualization in Scooby (both of which ARE present and are issues, although not at their worst in WAY) can often lead to an overlooking of the issues that are very present and clear in WAY and have continued since then with far too little resistance (I'm 100% talking about the racism here) HOWEVER that topic deserves at least a dozen posts of its own that I am no way informed or qualified enough to even begin to think about writing. The Gunn Movies are frustrating to many longtime Scooby fans because of these reasons, but for me, and fellow Scrappy Doo fans there is also the added aspect of the demonization of Scrappy Doo in the live action movies and the affects that has had on the popular culture as well, making it uniquely inhospitable to like or enjoy the character of Scrappy. End post.
19 notes
·
View notes
I literally just collapsed to the floor and burst into tears of relief at finding out that an assignment I thought was due at midnight tonight isn't due till tomorrow at midnight.
Even the roommate who I've lived with for 3.5y has never seen me cry, and all of them thought I must be dying or something.
5 notes
·
View notes
Unrelated to your tfbw au I just consumed and not a question but I find myself saying “woza” because of you /pos and I just think you should know that your writing has that kind of influence (I doubt I’m the only one experiencing this kind of Ninafication).
Anyway I think your content is golden and truthfully I mostly go on here to read your posts, no lie it literally makes my day better. Ok no more buttering, just thought I���d stop lurking for a sec 8)
AAAAAAA!!!! hello, my darling!!!! <3333 omg, i love the *stan vc* wowza. it's just the finest exclaimation of suprise, enchantment, merriment and awe. also, it's cute shdksh.
choose your fighter: the kyle 'mmm' sound or *stan vc* Wowza~
but when i tell you i am cheesing so hard!!!! that makes me feel so warm and fuzzy inside. i think it's so cute when you guys tell me about your accidental ninafication or that you use my weird little ncu ninaisms in your real lives. <333 i remember when people were telling me about how they started telling their friends that they 'hope they heal' or how they accidentally started saying *nina vc* 'JAIL!!!!
re: the specific weird colloquialisms i created in my style fanfics though. it really means a lot to me that you guys enjoyed stuff like the share chair or stan calling kyle kyle pile in pep or kyle calling stan stan the man w/ the plan, me making weird side characters like pep corner store guy raj as our narrator, or even just smile pendejo or i hope you heal because??? that was all stuff that i invented within the context of my ncuniverses and don't exist in the sp universe at all?
which is not to say i created them thoughtlessly or haphazardly, quite the opposite actually! i created them very consciously around how i think my styles would address each other, cute teenage boy things, their little inside jokes, style signing when stan is depressed etc. but the fact that that resonated with you guys enough and made enough sense in my fanfictions that you don't mind that i cobbled them into the canon and actually enjoy them enough to use them!!! AAAAA!!!
i'm sorry you got ninaficated, darling, but i am so glad you did. thank you for enjoying my content. recently, i've been feeling a lot of imposter syndrome over it again and wondering if i'm just kind of yelling into the void, posting content that people don't care about. i worry about my cadence in my posts, if they seem to be written poorly, if i'm clogging your dash with my nonsense...but this is very reassuring. i am glad you guys still care about my stuff even though it's been forever, i try to keep it really fun and interesting on here and shift gears a lot through my posts to keep your brains working.
and on the note of shifting gears and keeping things interesting, thank you for reading my tfbw posts AAAAAA!!!! i know i am insane, but if you tell me you read stuff about everything is going to be o.k :) or to kill a king and enjoyed it i will personally feed you candy. ilysm.
which i hope when you consumed it, it was candy-like in flavor!!!! i hope very much that you enjoyed it!!! i put a lot of time into my lore for it so it makes me super happy when you guys enjoy my less asked about au content. especially because!!! strangely enough, rm was my project AFTER pep that quite literally no one was asking about and i made just for me...and now...here we are like 200 asks later.
...Wowza.
all in all, thank you so much, my lovely, for this message. i feel like we listen to me blather so often that i never get to hear from any of you! so it's really nice when you guys chime in and i can chat with you! also, not to freak you guys out, but i do camp on the notes sometimes and get really excited when i see someone liking a bunch of posts because either you're catching up on your light reading of my bullshit or you're new which...welcome to hell, enjoy your Slay! xx
-uncle nina, space heating the room w/ my blush
6 notes
·
View notes