#{interview excerpts}

[maybuds]

from “Brian and Roger Eno: ‘Capitalists want you to be constantly stimulated’”

[Text ID in ALT text]

[letterful]

head in hands.

[notwiselybuttoowell]

Let’s start with Oregon – what does this mean for unhoused people in Grants Pass?

It means that Grants Pass can enforce its 24/7 citywide ban on public homelessness. The question was whether cities should be able to jail or fine someone who has no other alternative but to live in public space – the unhoused folks who are considered “involuntarily homeless”. The city was already allowed to arrest people who had declined offers of shelter. Now, Grants Pass will likely be fining people who have no shelter options.

When you fine someone who can’t pay, the fine can eventually turn into a misdemeanor. Studies have shown that it doesn’t help an already poor person to be driven into debt. Fining someone makes them less likely to emerge from homelessness, including by ruining their credit score and making them unable to afford basic needs like food.

Beyond fines, the city of Grants Pass is going to eventually jail more people. This is punishing people who have done nothing more than exist in public space. This case was about whether you can punish people for the unavoidable consequences of being human. The supreme court said yes.

How do you expect the decision will impact other jurisdictions across the west?

This is quite possibly the most consequential decision in history up until this point relating to homeless rights. It’s hard to overstate how important it is.

I think more cities will attempt 24/7 citywide bans on homelessness. I think it will encourage cities to shift away from investments in evidence-based approaches like adequately investing in affordable housing, permanent supportive housing and diversion and shift toward more law-and-order, enforcement-led efforts to essentially jail and banish already marginalized people from public view.

Grants Pass argued it wasn’t criminalizing the status of homelessness, but criminalizing the act of camping in public. The supreme court majority in its ruling on Friday concurred, and said that criminalizing an act does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.

Presumably cities could in the future go even further than Grants Pass has, as long as they frame their laws as prohibiting public camping, instead of prohibiting homelessness, although I don’t think that issue has been fully resolved by today’s decision.

Donald Trump and others have used increasingly dark rhetoric, threatening to force people into “tent cities”. Will the ruling embolden those kinds of efforts?

I think we could see the forced displacement of unhoused folks into what I would call internment camps out in the middle of nowhere – a mass migration of unhoused people from one place where their existence is banned to other places where the laws don’t ban their existence. Many cities already have authorized camps in far-out locations that are completely invisible to the general public. I learned about one that was bordered by a dump, a recycling center and railroad tracks – the quintessentially least desirable place.

The idea of rounding up unhoused folks and forcing them into camps or out of the jurisdiction entirely is obviously very concerning. And it should be of grave concern, because once something is invisible, you don’t know what’s happening to the already really vulnerable people living there. Trump has publicly contemplated using his federal authority to move people into the middle of the desert where they won’t bother anyone by existing. It’s a very dystopian vision of internment camps and the likely abuses and neglect that would come from that. It’s terrifying.

Prior to this ruling, cities already had quite a lot of latitude to restrict camping, correct?

Yes, cities could already sweep encampments as much as they like. In many cities, they’ve been sweeping tents at record rates. They could also already enforce anti-camping laws if there was something that could be shown to be an urgent public health or safety issue with respect to a particular encampment – for example, if an encampment was blocking a whole sidewalk. Cities could sweep without even giving notice in those circumstances. Under the previous standard, cities weren’t even required to provide adequate shelter. It just said if the city lacks shelter, it can’t jail or fine someone, which to me should be so straightforward, and yet somehow here we are.

How do you expect legal advocates for unhoused people will respond to this ruling?

The dehumanizing message of today’s decision is going to galvanize civil rights attorneys. It has to. Anytime somebody’s basic right to exist is threatened, civil rights activists have to regroup. And cities should not approach this too cavalierly. There will be legal consequences for cities that pursue 24/7 citywide bans on homelessness. All this decision does is remove the protections for unhoused folks under the eighth amendment of the US constitution. States across the country have analogs to the eighth amendment in their state constitutions. States can and often do interpret their state constitutional provisions to be more protective than the federal constitution. The eighth amendment at its core is really about how much we value the humanity of vulnerable people. So it’s crippling from a human standpoint to have that protection removed. But there are other avenues that homeless rights advocates and human rights lawyers can still pursue. They can make arguments under other federal constitutional provisions. There are still due process arguments under the 14th amendment. You can still argue there is selective prosecution. There are arguments that could be made under the fourth amendment [which protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures]. There’s the Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA], and most chronically homeless people would likely qualify as someone with a disability who has protections from state-sanctioned abuse.

[tendermimi]

“I might still be too young in my grief to know where it ends.”

— Ocean Vuong, The Guardian Interview

[rainbowpopeworld]

(Edited to add: not an actual quote from Michael Sheen - this is a meme)

[platoapproved]

for @dancinbutterfly who requested this, but also any non tvc book readers who may be curious... here's some excerpts from the scene in the vampire armand where a bunch of guys are bidding for which one of them gets to fuck amadeo and marius encourages it / treats it as a game / commands amadeo to kiss one of them while he kills him. imho this is a part of the text the show writers likely drew inspiration from for the idea of marius 'donating' amadeo.

for reference, these are all taken from chapter 5! so @dancinbutterfly you can direct your friend who doesn't believe this was in the text there.

how do i even begin to content warn for this, it's so fucking BAD. i guess the usual tva warnings for grooming & csa, sexual assault, pedophilia, kind of incest?, slavery, just... marius bein' marius y'know. (IT'S REALLY BAD. like i do just want to emphasize for anyone who has not read tva it's quite explicit and upsetting plz be aware):

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

[theinfinitedivides]

interview with the vampire, s1, amc, 2022 / molloy, samuel beckett, 1955

original gif sources for stills (full gifs not reposted out of courtesy to creators): ep 7 — @emmaziadarcy

[excerptum]

In films, we are voyeurs, but in novels, we have the experience of being someone else: knowing another person's soul from the inside. No other art form does that. And this is why sometimes, when we put down a book, we find ourselves slightly altered as human beings. Novels change us from within.

Donna Tartt, Chatelaine Interview (2013)

[stewyhosseini-bf]

[derangedrhythms]

Edna St. Vincent Millay, Fatal Interview: from 'Now by this moon, before this moon shall wane...'

[buwaiyakin]

"Until the running of our blood becomes One with the whirlings of forgotten suns, One with the heavings of forsaken seas, One music with all that is dear earth; Until there is no more for armoured life But, lovingly, to lay down arms before The earth imperative, transfigured Earth Until we find night-breathing pray’r upon Our twisted lips:                             We are commemoration Of a dead, but resurrected life" - R. Zulueta da Costa

[silvianap]

Q: "When did you first feel your voice was heard?"

A: "(...) when I was fortunate enough I got a part in a Tv show called Game of Thrones, and it was playing a woman who was very much outside of the conventions of society for women. She's very tall, she's very strong, she was described as ugly, she was a knight, she could fight. It was sort of everything that traditionally women had been told they weren't to be. And it really spoke to me. It really connected with me and with my experiences. And suddenly through that part I felt like my voice in the world was being heard. And what was beautiful about it, it was that no one expected it to be a success. But that difference somehow resonated through the world and into the audience. And people, it didn't matter who they were or where they came from, they found a commonality with that character and they loved her. And that's really when I really felt in a magical way that my voice was heard."

This is the excerpt that moved me the most from the new, BEAUTIFUL interview that Gwen gave to "Young BAFTA X Place2Be" for Children's Mental Health Week. I totally recognized myself in her words, I am one of those people.

I heard you, Gwen. 💙

(-> twitter post)

[mementoboni]

About the lyrics of VINUSHKA and UROBOROS

Kyo: (...) What's in the lyrics is also not the hatred or loathing that was mentioned earlier, but the open world seen from the bottom. Even the same sky, I think it looks and feels different when you look at it from the plain, and from low down at the bottom. What Kyo of DIR EN GREY wants to do is to look at the sky from the bottom. And a sense of aftertaste.

Kyo: However, there are no open words in the lyrics, just full of despair and anger, but when I finish listening to it, strangely, I don't feel a sense of despair. Although it wasn't written directly in words, it left an impression of great positivity and strength.

source: SPECIAL INTERVIEW-UROBOROS by PURE VOICE MAN (GIGS magazine [ December 2008 ] )

This is one of my favorite interviews of Kyo :)

[soulmatesinc-if]

—the MC Effect in action

[chaoticlandworlder]

Max suffered long-term visibility issues after the Silverstone 2021 crash

[kraeki]

Excerpts from an interview with Dominik

On Liverpool:

“Of course, I always knew about LFC, that it was a huge club, even before Klopp, and when he arrived Liverpool became even bigger. He's been here 9 years, I was 14 then, so I only see the time since he's been here. I am very attracted to this place, the team, the people, the players the goals, everything.”

On Klopp:

“Well... I think he's the best coach I've ever worked with, extra as a human being, extra in football knowledge, extra in his attitude towards players, extra in his attitude towards the team.”

On his confidence:

“This is how I am, this is my habit. To some, I still seem arrogant. I don't call it arrogance, but self-confidence, as Ibrahimovic once said. You need self-confidence to be able to maintain this level, it is not so simple in everyday life.”

On intigrating into Liverpool:

“Everything seems so simple from the outside. However, there are things that you can’t claim as your own from day 1. You go into the dressing room, and of course they welcome you, but who do you turn to and talk to? Who do you go to breakfast with, go to the gym with?”

On getting to know his teammates:

“There are a few there, but they probably don’t [have a lot in common]. This takes time, learning to get to know each other. That was the hard part.”

On the first player he got on with at Liverpool:

“Well, Trent. At first he was distant, but then he realised that my temperament was similar to his, and we started to get closer to each other.”