#I could have searched many more quotes and give more examples

[burningcheese-merchant]

A Thought About Shadow Milk Cookie

I actually meant to make this post months ago, but I sort of let it fall to the wayside for the sake of other things. Now Blue Gatorade Cookie is coming out tomorrow and I'm like "ahhh shit I'm late" lol. Consider this a sequel/accompanying piece to the Burning Spice Cookie post

Shadow Milk always gave me a bit of the impression of being a Victor Frankenstein type. If you haven't read the book (please do, it's fantastic), then this quote sums up both the character, the story, and my perception of Shadow Milk pretty well:

"Learn from me, if not by my precepts, at least by my example, how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge, and how much happier that man is who believes his native town to be the world, than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow."

Knowledge is power. Knowledge is freedom. Equally so, perhaps even MORE so, knowledge is fun. It's fun to learn new things. And with all of this in mind, Shadow Milk did his best to pursue the knowledge he so championed, and share it with the world, whatever it was. You give a man a fish and he eats for a day; you teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime. So Shadow Milk made it his mission to teach all men to fish. To teach them to read, to cook, to sew. To teach them magic, to teach them science, to teach them whatever filled the gap between. Perhaps he even went so far as to become a close associate of a certain academy, if not outright being its founder (Blueberry Yogurt Academy theorists, where you at lol). Anything to achieve the ultimate goal of inspiring others to learn and thrive as he does.

But as I said, knowledge is fun. There doesn't necessarily need to be a reason for it. Maybe Shadow Milk never actually needed one; even if there was no one left to teach, he could always teach himself, for he was always his own greatest student. And so whenever he had time, he read every book he could get his hands on. Practiced every spell. Sang every song, recited every poem, memorized every bit of meaningless trivia. Anything and everything to feed his endless hunger for more knowledge. Because it was... fun. It was freeing, to have those little burdens of doubt lifted from his shoulders, however inconsequential they actually were. And - however much he was able to admit it, to himself or to others - it made him feel powerful.

Until he started learning things no one else had before. That no one else could. That no one else should.

Maybe he learned how to peek into people's minds, and saw exactly how vapid, selfish, stupid and cruel so many of us really are beneath the façades we wear. Maybe he uncovered secrets that accidentally tore apart families, scandals that threw governments into chaos, acts of betrayal that may have started wars. Maybe one day, he learned the ultimate truth of the world; who and what cookies were really supposed to be, and what their makers really thought of them. (Not too far off from White Lily, really.)

In his desperation for solutions as well as some semblance of self-comfort, Shadow Milk just kept on learning. Kept searching for answers. Kept acquiring more and more knowledge. Because it was all he ever knew how to do. It was all he believed himself to be good for. But it was never enough. Not only did he never truly find the answers he sought - whether it be because they never existed in the first place, or because whatever he found only made him ask even more questions than before - but he just kept going down more and more rabbit holes. And he couldn't stop himself-

No. That's not true. Of course he could. He just didn't want to. Because knowledge is power, and deep down inside, he was always power-hungry. And besides that, he was just so curious. Morbid curiosity can be a terrible sin. Perhaps a small part of him, one he never wanted to give credence to, relished in being smarter than everyone else. And maybe that same part of him was also hubristic enough to believe he could learn whatever he wanted to, whenever he wanted to, just because he could.

Perhaps Shadow Milk tried to sound the alarm, so to speak. Share those great and terrible truths he uncovered with the world. But nobody listened, no matter how much they believed in and respected him otherwise. Because the truth is stranger than fiction, more often than not, and there's only so much strangeness people can tolerate. Knowing this - knowing how foolish people can really be, how quick they are to shun the truth to protect their own feelings - he looked for another answer, like he always does. Shadow Milk always had a fondness for theatrics; he wasn't just a scholar, he was a poet, a playwright, an artist. And thus, it was with these talents and loves of his that he tried to teach people what he knew. He wrote stageplays that became famous. Fantasy novels that became bestsellers. Poems and essays that were read aloud in classrooms. Everything he could throw at the wall with as much panache as possible. Because that's who he is, and that's what people are more likely to listen to. People like bread and circuses, so he gave them a whole bakery and performed every circus act himself.

But it was never enough. Those threads of truth he so carefully wove into the tapestries of his work; no one felt them. Those easter eggs he hid; no one found them. Nobody ever saw what he saw, whether he snuck it into the picture or plastered it right in the center. And so Shadow Milk came to realize that no one ever actually wanted to know the truth, no one ever actually wanted to learn anything, no one ever actually valued knowledge. All people cared about was what they could personally gain from it and nothing more. No higher purpose of any kind. Just what conveniences and inconveniences them.

And what's the point in helping people like that? How do you teach the unteachable?

Shadow Milk likely became bitter (or sour, because lol milk). Maybe he slowly began turning truths against people. Hoarding people's secrets and spilling them randomly, just out of spite (and discreetly, because he wasn't looking to be caught, and nobody was smart enough to catch him anyway). Making puppets and plays depicting people at their absolute worst, and watching them all smile and clap because they fell for it. They fell for his jokes. For his ruse. They didn't notice he was mocking them without a shred of irony or remorse. The only art Shadow Milk became interested in after he succumbed to despair was telling cruel jokes at others' expense and painting pictures for all the Dorian Grays of the world so they can keep lying and pretending they're good and that they're worth something. Because lies are all people really want to hear, right? Because it makes them feel better about their miserable lives?

I'm sure Shadow Milk tried to turn back, even if only once, for just a minute. He's smart, he's wise, he knew what the end of that road looked like. Maybe he sat up all night just arguing with himself about it. About the nature of his work. The meaning of the knowledge he acquired. The meaning of knowledge itself. What was he doing this for, really? What has he EVER done this for? Was it really for others, or for himself? What if he gained all the knowledge in the universe, then what? What would he do after that? What if he did manage to convince people, what then? What if they panic? Turn on each other? Turn on him? Were they really better off not knowing?

Was he just slowly talking himself through that door until it was closed and locked? Did he do so knowingly? Did he delay the inevitable for... for what? Did he even know that?

All the knowledge in the world didn't save Shadow Milk from falling to darkness, nor did it save anyone from the chaos he chose to wreak afterwards. Maybe knowledge never saved anyone from anything. What is knowledge, anyway? What is truth? What is deceit? The more you know, the more you realize you don't know anything at all. Maybe truth and deceit are one and the same. Maybe reality is only what you perceive it to be. Maybe life is a joke. Maybe people should just have fun. Lie all you want. Tell truths just to drive wedges and shatter hopes and dreams. It doesn't matter. It's all the same. There's no way out.

TL;DR: Knowledge is power, but power corrupts. Perhaps not all truths are worth knowing, after all. Be careful with what you learn, and what you know. And be careful not to believe yourself to be smart enough to dictate what truth and lies and knowledge are to others, for no one truly is. That kind of hubris will only lead to disaster.

(I'm sorry if some of this sounds weird or doesn't make full sense. I wanted to get my thoughts out before the update to see if it turns out that anything I say has official merit lol)

[trainsinanime]

Is there a specific scientific term for what I'll call "harm construction", meaning "thinking of ways that something harms someone in order to condemn it"? There must be, right? I see it all the time and it's not new. Let me give some examples in random order.

One of the first cases where I really remember it was at least a decade ago, an online article by a British newspaper, about how an online store had put a pole dancing pole in their toys section. A bit of an embarrassing mistake but nothing more.

However, that article provided several quotes from a British couple who said they were very worried, because their kid could have seen that. It seems pretty clear that their kid did not, in fact, actually see it, but the newspaper treated their concern as if it was a genuine thing to worry about. It was utterly ridiculous.

A more recent example is a call-out ask I received a few months ago and, of course, immediately deleted, but it's still been living rent-free in my head since then, because it was so horribly bad. I'll not repeat the exact wording, but they were annoyed that their victim blog (which I don't follow and haven't for years, if ever, and they don't follow me) was annoying and sometimes said mean things. They very ineptly tried to explain that this might have been part of the reasons why someone else, completely unrelated, sent out hate messages to yet another person. That was the harm that was so big that it supposedly justified a targeted harassment campaign. (If you're the person who wrote that call-out ask, please rethink your life. You were only increasing the hate in the world, not making anything better. I suspect the sender wasn't anyone who actually follows me, but just in case).

The biggest and most prominent example of harm construction right now is of course all about trans people, bathrooms and school sports. Conservatives and TERFs alike need a reason to oppose the existence of trans people beyond "I personally find them weird", because saying that out loud gets them correctly branded as bigots. How do you turn "let's be really mean to a marginalised group" into a progressive cause? By saying that the existence of this group causes harm. The problem with that is that trans people existing does not actually cause any harm, it's literally fine.

So in an effort to construct harm after all, they have searched far and wide for something that trans people could even theoretically damage, and the only things they managed to come up with are "there might be someone with unexpected genitals behind that bathroom stall door" and "the sanctity of gender-segregated sports". If it weren't for their cultural and political power then it would almost be funny how little potential harm they managed to find and how much they have to amplify it. They're just another couple in the newspaper worried that their kid might potentially see a website.

If you look for it, harm construction is everywhere, because we all sort of agree on a surface level that dividing people into "normal, acceptable" and "weird, must be punished" isn't nice, but the instinct to punish people for being "weird" is still alive and well and many people refuse to question it.

At a completely different end, anytime someone uses the word "normalisation" about a fanfic on Ao3, that's another example. We all know making blorbos do weird things doesn't actually hurt anybody (assuming proper tagging and so on), but we still want to punish people who do it wrong. So we construct harm, by arguing that seeing something on Ao3 might "normalise" the thing and make it more likely that someone will do it in real life.

These examples are very different, at very different ends of almost all scales of power and cultural influence and meaning, but the core idea is always the same. So, yeah. There must be a better term for this.

[tocomplainfriend]

BIG POST ABOUT ACE REP IN HB/HH

ALASTOR:

I'm ace spec and I hate this shitty mix of stereotypes

So many people see Ace or Aro (and both) people as people who must not have feelings. That if you don't feel romantic or sexual attraction for example "you must be broken" in the same way people connect that to people like serial killers like Alastor. The not having feelings or empathy for people also connects to of all that. And the automatic connection of "no feelings, no empathy" = "ace", Because of the usual conflation of Ace and Aromantic. (Specially cause a lot of people have heard more about Asexual than Aromatic, and can't separate sexual and romantic attraction and empathy)

Again, the general canon treatment and vivs treatment of Alastor also leads to the idea of Complete sex repulsed Ace and Complete romance repulsed Aro. But when ask about his romantic attraction, she doesn't state it as much as she states his Asexuality.

"If I give the real cannon answer...it's gonna... it's gonna... I don't want to ruin anybody's fun, so..."

Old post about this, plus the video of the quote:

Crew notes for Al:

MAMMON:

What!? Yeah! Came out of nowhere! Now we got two Ace characters that are extra terrible people that hurt others cause of the idea of shitty with empathy connected to Asexuality is all around... "Too bad/selfish of a person" = ace

I think they really just put this in at random. I don't think it was pre planed to have him as Ace because of how Octavia and Al are written.

Al is written with the simplicity of him being so not into sex that they portrayed him as if he didn't know about it in Hunicast. But Mammon is constantly profiting of the sexualization of Fizz, now Glitz and Glam. Constantly using prude language as well. I think if there was an intention before, they wouldn't have done that. Viv hasn't shown me a deeper understanding of Ace spectrums at all, I don't trust this. She picked the fat character, the series and merch doesn't sexualize like the others. He always had clothes on and nothing kinky. (for example...Viv also doesn't show a deeper/ or non-basic/non-stereotyped understanding of pansexuality)

But if it was an understanding of Ace spectrum, I'll take that. Mammon being ace, but he can understand and feel comfortable with people feeling attracted to him in that kind of way, like portrayed in the sexy merch?

BUT he is the only fat character and the only one never portrayed as naked or with fewer clothes in comparison to literally all the characters (including one offs) isn't this Viv and crew searching something to not having to sexualize him like they do with all the others? The two other Ace characters in this list don't get sexualized at all (thank god, Octavia is a kid) with the idea that Ace = 0 interaction with anything sex or attraction related....

REMEMBER, ACE IS AN SPECTRUM.

ACE PEOPLE CAN STILL HAVE SEX OR VIEW THEMSELVES AS SEXY AND WEAR SEXY CLOTHES.

They are also only using the Ace flag? Mammon is using the color for his clothes, so it could be Demi or Grey too, I wouldn't know, but it doubts it... Demi could match his actual outfit cause of the diamond shape things are like the triangle in the flag too tho!

That he is not treated like he doesn't know how sex works is surprisingly/sadly good. When the only thing you got is how Viv treated Al in Hunicast.

(Hopefully there is no weird implication that he is only at pride as a shitty rainbow capitalism thing, and that he is not connected to the cause of pride because he is Ace and implicated as "not to being connected as much". Really don't think so, but is always a worry that there could be a treatment of you are not as LGBTQ+ because you are ace so...!)

OCTAVIA: oh brother, I think she only got put on this because she is a minor, not to be sexualized in the heavily sexualized media. I mean, thank god.

I guess she's spilling her coffee at Stolas being sexual in the phone to Blitz in front of her, and telling them to get a room is the implication of Asexuality? Likewise, I think everyone doesn't want to hear their parent do dirty talk and attempt flirting in front of them.

Are any of these gonna matter or have an exploration or mention it? In the same way, there is a mention of (mainly male) gayness? No.

I don't think so...

Btw also no nonbinary? No gender-fluid or... nothing? No? Damn...

[deadpresidents]

Hi, I have a question of attribution/provenance regarding a quote you posted about Nixon a while back (like, years back 😅). The quote was this:

"Can you imagine what this man could have been had somebody loved him? Had somebody in his life cared for him? I don't think anybody ever did, not his parents, not his peers. He would have been a great, great man had somebody loved him." - Henry Kissinger in an interview TIME's Hugh Sidey.

I think this is a significant insight into understanding Nixon, but I'm interested in finding the primary source in full. The quote has been tossed around a bunch and I tried to find the original interview, but couldn't find that particular column via google or the Time Magazine archive.

It's cited in Evan Thomas's Being Nixon, but I don't own that book and the Internet Archive doesn't have a digital version either. Based on my snooping through the keyword search preview, and the fact that the quote is cited in other articles pre-2015, I think it might have first been printed outside of the interview itself in Ambrose's Nixon: Ruin and Recovery? But I don't own that either. So if you have a link/copy of the interview, or any earlier source that gives more info (like, what issue of Time was it published in?), I'd really really appreciate it.

Thank you so much if you take the time to answer this, and for all the work you've done and posts you've made over the years on here! I'vd been following since like 2015 or so.

First of all, thanks for following for so long and for the nice comments.

I agree that it's a fascinating and insightful quote about who Richard Nixon was and what he could have been.

I did a little bit of digging after getting your question because I do have copies of Being Nixon and Nixon: Ruin and Recovery, and have also worked very hard over the years to track down as many of Hugh Sidey's "The Presidency" columns that he published in LIFE Magazine and TIME Magazine from the mid-1960s until the early 2000s. Sidey had excellent relationships and access to every President from JFK to George W. Bush, so his columns were invaluable windows into the institution of the Presidency and the personality of the Presidents he covered.

I'm not sure where I saw the Kissinger quote about Nixon originally, but Being Nixon (BOOK | KINDLE | AUDIO) by Evan Thomas cites Stephen E. Ambrose's Nixon, Volume 3: Ruin and Recovery, 1973-1990 (BOOK | KINDLE) as his source. I was hoping that there was a clear example of the quote from one of Sidey's many columns over the decades, but when I tracked down the citation in Ambrose's book, it apparently came from Sidey when Ambrose interviewed him while researching Ruin and Recovery. In the notes, Ambrose cites an author interview with Hugh Sidey on February 27, 1990 as the source of the Kissinger quote. I wish there was a more straightforward source of the quote because it is such an important one, but hopefully that helps out a little bit. I don't know if Ambrose's papers are available online anywhere, but if so, that 1990 interview with Sidey would be the place to look for more information.

[askganon]

Great King, in the past you took care of a great bird you called "Helmaroc King." What is he a king of if I may ask. There are countless, though very rare and valuable, feathers as well as capes MADE of said feathers called "Roc's feather" and "Roc's Cape," typically electric blue in colour. Many copies of the legendary Pegasus Boots also use said feathers to achieve the speed they offer and in some cases temporary flight. There are countless mentions of these artifacts through out every era in every timeline, yet not ONCE in any record or account does a "Roc" or "Helmaroc" exist beyond your avian king. Let me be clear, I do not doubt the validity of the dear bird's royalty nor your judgement to recognize it, I am just baffled by this elusive magical creature known as "Roc" and how it has managed to avoid any and ALL documentation and whether or not it TRULY exists! There are sparse mentions of "Kargarocs" but none of them have feathers matching the features of ANY of the relics, blue or otherwise, in addition to lacking any ability to make ones body, quote "light as a feather" so SURELY they cant be said legendary "Roc" or "Helmaroc." I figure should anyone in any realm or land know the answer to this mystery, surely someone as wise and experienced as yourself would know. I didn't want to ask you at first because why trouble you and take away your time to hand me an answer with no effort put in on my part when I could find the research myself through hard work and effort, but I have poured YEARS of my life into this research, been to practically every land, kingdom, realm and island searching for any record of this elusive blue bastard and I am confidant I have followed every possible lead and have found NOTHING. Please Mr. Dragmire sir, please tell me you know what a "Roc" even is and its relation if any to the Helmaroc King...

A Roc in Hyrule is a large predatory bird, with many branching subspcies. Kargoroks are a common subspecies.

To give you an example of my meaning, a Mol is simply a large beast that burrows in the desert, but there are many forms such as Twinmold, Molgera, and Molduga.

The Helmaroc King was the largest and mightiest Kargoroc. He is more akin in size to a true Roc, though he is a Kargoroc.

Does this give you the answer you seek?

[aeolianblues]

I’m just going to have to accept my place at some point— accept that the aural is always going to be an inherently less engaging medium to catch people’s attention. Going to have to accept someday that there’s nothing like putting a film out there, no matter what the budget; a low-budget shoddily made visual thing, a film, a TV show, a documentary; what have you, will probably always leave audio an inferior and less catchy medium. You can speak your heart out, you can make as many radio documentaries. At the end of the day what is going to catch people’s attention is the Kneecap (the film)s and the Complete Unknowns of this world. Radio docs can’t ever hope to touch those dizzying heights, nor tbh do books and written stuff. All this personally pertains to music, and I’ve been thinking about it as a music journalist myself.

No one reads interviews anymore. It’s a lost art. People are subscribing to magazines (print or digital) as a purely preservationist move: they want this form of media and journalism to survive. Also it’s skimmable I suppose. It’s not often a particularly inspiring medium to convey ideas about music. Hey, though the famous saying goes, writing about music is like dancing about architecture (this is an actual and widely quoted saying, actually). Fine. Accepted. What about music through audio, does that not seem appropriate a medium?

Nope. Not shareable. Not relatable. I’ve spent years trying, god knows I’ve talked to some really interesting people even at my infantile levels of being a journalist, but audio is so opaque. You can’t ‘search’ it, you can’t share a snappy visual that doesn’t require people to actually listen for a full minute—60 seconds of your time! Even as audio is the medium to which music belongs, musicians simply cannot belong to it. You can’t tell who’s who, you don’t know what the musicians look like, a visual (and often important) element of how musicians present is lost.

It’s got to be films then, hasn’t it? Kneecap’s compelling story could never reach as many people on the many, many interviews they’d done recounting the very same over the last 6 years at least. They have been around for a while. Since 2017, in fact. But it was the film, the visuals accompanying it, that actually brought it to a wider audience and made Kneecap household names. A Complete Unknown too, like I’d mentioned. Reintroducing Dylan to a generation, reconnecting others with their love for the man and his life.

And, I guess, I am on tumblr right now after all, so it’d be amiss not to mention. The humble GIF. Ironically, the GIFs, muted, looping animated frames, are what can propel a lot of musicians to website-wide stardom sometimes. What a selling point GIFs have been, of so many media, on this website. (I think the visual being so strong is also why I see, for example, way more people willing to gif out, idolise and follow the fictional band in We Are Lady Parts than actually listen to bands like The Muslims or Habibi, draw fanart of Hobie Brown from the animated Spiderman film than listen to Crystal Axis. Who, FYI, put out one the best grungy rock tracks I’ve heard this year.

Why people will follow a rebellious-smirking, leather jacket-wearing fictional character than a real-life punk band. If I were having a cynical day (and I try so hard not to, it’s self-defeating! It does nothing to help anything I’m doing!) then I’d say this website cares more about fictional characters they can dream about than wanting to give a shit about real people making art in the present— or real people in general. But I try not to. I acknowledge that visuals are powerful, and embellished storylines can be more compelling than real life.)

But that brings me to my lament: many, many real people have incredible stories to be told. Someone once said to me something like, all musicians have something a little wrong with them, because the desire to stand up on a platform and tell stories and open yourself up to emotional vulnerability, to visibility, to ridicule, takes a certain kind of illness and incredible courage. People that get up on stage DO have a story to tell. That’s why they’re out there singing on their own words. In their voices. About the lives they live and those around them do.

But they’ll never be told. Filming is still high budget. I could script out a band’s life and write it in a book (you know I could. Some of you already know I’m capable of dragging things on with every minute detail). I could narrate and produce an audio documentary about it. But it’ll never be as powerful as what can be done with a film crew. The reach of visuals is beyond what anything else can convey.

So many incredible stories will be lost. It’s happened before, of course. When Sam Sutherland wrote his book Perfect Youth, about the history of the first wave of punk rock in Canada in the late 1970s, he was the first to attempt a comprehensive history of Canadian punk. This was in 2012. Shocking, right! The UK and US scenes were way better documented: films about the Sex Pistols and the Clash ensured the London scene was enshrined in legend forever. The punks of Manchester were documented (in no small part thanks to the fact that some of the biggest stars of indie, post punk and New Romantic music of the 80s were Manchester youth punks in the 70s). The NYC scene is extremely well documented, where would I begin. But in Canada, many of its original troublemakers were dead, had moved on, had never recorded their music and were now.thousands of kilometres across the country, and the venues were long shut, repurposed or bulldozed. Montreal’s ‘first punk band’, the 222s, only have a few surviving recordings out there because a presenter on a campus radio station in Montreal they has one done a session for, had found he never threw their tape away. The only surviving recordings. Many others weren’t that lucky, even when (similar to Manchester), Montreal punk in the 70s provided a playground for some of the best-loved indie and pop rock bands of the 80s, like the Doughboys and Men Without Hats. Canadian punks in the 70s hadn’t had the awareness of legacy, nor the sort of money it’d take to record vinyl, much less have a camera running. Nothing was saved.

It’s a similar thing with bands today, even though equipment and editing software is relatively cheaper. Many people feel filming bands is a bit of sunken effort. We host one of my country’s biggest film festivals, and I never see student filmmakers taking part in the music video programmes. These are fully funded. Sure, local bands will do the portrait cellphone Instagram reel recording, but barring a single viral video that does not guarantee people listening to your music, it’s not quite the same as properly shot camera footage.

(Often with viral reels, it seems people blow up for things that are at best adjacent to their music. A video shitting on the role of the bassist in the band. A drummer complaining about how long everyone else takes to set up their pedalboard. Singer being a diva. ‘Guess what instrument this member plays’. It doesn’t really tell you the story behind a band, nor guarantees they’ll listen to your tunes. One too many a viral band has had scores of angry ‘fans’ yelling at them that they’ve posted their latest single ‘too many times.’ Hello?? Entitlement much?)

I don’t know what the solution is, to be quite honest. We’ve done filmed radio sessions, and while in theory you’d think people like those more than just us saying ‘hey this is on radio (audio) tomorrow morning!’, in reality people don’t care quite as much. They leave a like on our reels and move on, 10 people will actually follow on to the YouTube, and that’s often band members their proud dads (I’ve been followed by so many proud dads, I’ve awwed). So people leave. It’s a thankless job. Unless you’re KEXP it’s not really rewarding either. And I’ve kept it running for two years, but I’m not immune to burnout, or what you could call ‘yelling in the void’ fatigue. I feel stupid doing this stuff, sometimes. I’ll never tell anyone because it’s my job to keep the morale up, but it’s rewardless and sometimes tiring. Not that you expect anything out of it.

Maybe better video editing software, or better graphics processing will make this task easier. In the meanwhile, I guess don’t lose heart? I’ve written this out textually, and that means if anyone at all has read this far, then text isn’t dead yet. Takeaways? Don’t succumb to ‘my generation is shit, no one’s interesting anymore.’ They are. It’s just really hard to reach you through the algorithm. So I say, pay attention locally. There’s nothing like going to a great local show for $7 and seeing quality hidden gems. You can talk to them after the show even! It feels like cheating to have access to it. Someone will eventually do it. In the meanwhile, keep heart. And big up, Rich Pepiatt.

[ice-sculptures]

Okay well I’ve already forced u to look at most of my pets so I’m kinda just gonna copy u…what r ur favorite buck and/or eddie quotes?? I can NEVER think of any when I’m making graphics and u remember the show so much better than I do LOLL

OHHHHH MY GOD THERE'S SO MANY

some off the top of my head:

"two cut lines" - like. okay. i still maintain that the rest of the firefam doesn't actually know how close buck & eddie are and definitely do not fully realize the extent of buck's role in the diazes' life, but one thing that the rest of them Do know is that buck would rather die than leave eddie behind and i love tht these three simple words encapsulate the strength of that undying devotion

"and that started with you. whatever happens to him next, you gave him that second chance. maybe that's the point." i will never ever ever ever ever ever be over this scene and how buck found the exact words to bring eddie back from the brink and show him that what he does matters, that there's still hope, that there are things worth living for and that he made a difference in someone's life. and i think that this right here is more than romance more than love this is just. soulmatism right here. i mean....to be seen to be found isn't that what we're all searching for?

AND ON THAT NOTE. BUCK. THERE'S NOBODY IN THIS WORLD THAT I TRUST WITH MY SON MORE THAN YOU. makes me fucking INSANE because what do you mean eddie forgave him instantly?? in any other show with any other pairing this would be a season long arc with the two of them tentatively reconciling at the very end of it all. anybody else would be (understandably, i might add) nervous to leave christopher with buck after what happened, but eddie forgave buck immediately. eddie, who adores chris with all of his heart and soul, who loves that boy more than anything else in this world, saw not that buck wasn't able to hold onto chris, but that he loved him enough to try. he didn't hold it against him for chris getting swept away, he only focused on the buck that spent all day bloody and bruised, searching for his heart. but more than anything, i think he saw all of that love and heartbreak and guilt and the self doubt that matches his own reflected in buck and decided to give his best, truest friend the chance that was never given to him 🥺😭

"comes in handy when you have a bunch of holes in the wall" i can't explain why i love this bit of casual reassurance so much but i just. i think it's so simple and so sweet and a testament to how they make each other feel so loved so easily :(

i don't remember the exact quote right now but do you remember that scene where eddie and hen are gossiping about hen's mom and eddie says that his abuela would love the tea bc she loves telenovelas and buck beams at him w the fondest grin ever and teases eddie about loving telenovelas too? i know they're soulmates and in love and all of that shit but they're also Best Friends and i love all these little reminders of how well they know each other and how much they genuinely like each other. also this being in the same episode as buck's look of complete confusion when his long term gf tells him she loves him was a Choice™️

"just gonna be you and me" from the LS crossover episode for no reason other than it was cute & i love buck's subsequent jealousy

"guess all that company must've wore you out" bc of the obvious Implications that maddie tried to rope eddie into her plan of sending buck visitors to cheer him up and eddie straight up said no because he knew that wasn't going to help. yet another one of the million examples of these two knowing exactly what the other person needs & also Being exactly what the other person needs

"three minutes and seventeen seconds" because what do you MEAN he knows the exact amount of time buck was dead for. what do you mean he counted the seconds that he lived in this world without his best friend, praying and begging that he could outrun the clock and he wouldn't reach the time that would make it permanent. what do you mean he memorized the amount of time and then he threw out that line so casually because he couldn't stand the way they were talking about buck's death as something fascinating instead of as the worst three minutes and seventeen seconds of eddie's life...

the one-two punch that is "you don't need to pretend with me" and "you don't have to be anything for anybody" because both of them have spent so much of their lives not feeling good enough and not truly living for themselves...and yet around each other they've never had to do that and are free to be nothing but themselves and still be loved not despite it, but for it.

and finally last but not least....the very thesis of their relationship: "you can have my back any day" / "yeah. or, you know, you could… you could have mine" because it's stayed true ever since the first day they met and will remain true for the rest of their lives. also i'll never stop thinking about how 911 straight up said "isn't that what we all want in a partner? knowing that they have your back?" in the season five finale and have shown time and again that buck and eddie have tried to accomplish this in their previous relationships but have only ever been able to have a full and true partnership with each other...yeah that shit will Haunt me forever

this is probably incomprehensible but my mind is running at a million miles an hour right now so i am not going to go back and edit it

[hollygl125]

yo umm i was wondering and couldn't find on google so i think you could help me

the shifts in csi (like day shift, graveyard shift etc) are around which times?

Hello, lovely anon,

First of all, my sincere apologies for not having responded to your query in a timely (or, you know, remotely helpful) manner. Not as an excuse, but as an attempt at an explanation, I will tell you that I have been kind of a disaster person lately (much more so than indicated in the linked post, and even much more so this past fall than now) and don’t always have a ton of control over where my mind chooses to focus.

I should also acknowledge that, while I carried out my fall 2021 CSI rewatch (when I didn’t realize I was subsequently going to care about any of these details) with sort of rapt attention, in my (yes, many) subsequent rewatches I have often skipped scenes or storylines that don’t really interest me (e.g., where neither Sara Sidle nor Gil Grissom is anywhere to be found), and I am almost always doing two or three things at once while watching. So it’s certainly more than possible I have missed some non-GSR details in there.

In response to your question, the two things I can tell you with certainty are these:

The CSIs of CSI have three shifts: day shift, swing shift, and night/graveyard shift (this last being what the lead characters of CSI are generally working). Logic would dictate that, with three shifts and 24 hours in a day, the shifts most likely start (and end) eight hours apart. (I will not, however, state that logic necessarily dictates that the shifts each be eight hours, and I will discuss that more below.)

At the end of “Mea Culpa” (05x09), after Warrick, Nick, and Catherine are transferred from night/graveyard shift to swing shift, Warrick tells Grissom, “Well, I got to get some rest. Swing shift starts at four in the afternoon. That’s a big change.”

Based on the above (and what I will discuss below), the best answer I can give is that the shifts should start at the following times (and end approximately, though not necessarily exactly, eight hours later):

Day shift: 8:00 a.m.

Swing shift: 4:00 p.m.

Night/graveyard shift: 12:00 a.m. (midnight).

(I will also note some contradictory information below the cut, although I don’t know the source of that information.)

But the other thing I will note (and for which I will give some possibly excessive examples below the cut) is that CSI does a pretty terrible job of keeping track of these kind of workplace logistics. You might have thought the writers and showrunners of what was for a time the most popular scripted TV show in the world (or something like that) would have added a few notes to their show bible about workplace logistics (shift times, scheduling, etc.) but . . . nope, not in any way that is apparent to me! (I find wanting to write a story that is compatible with the internal logic of the show and finding there really is no internal logic of the show to be terribly frustrating.)

Shift times:

Okay, to be honest, the first place I looked for an answer to your query was in @addictedtostorytelling’s wonderful meta, both because she is an expert in (among many other things!) these finer details (e.g., dates on documents shown in the show) and because I was pretty sure I had seen a post from her that addressed shift times.

The only post I could find on the topic was this one, in which the asker states that “we know there are 3 csi shifts: day (7am to 3pm), swing (3pm to 11pm) and night (11pm to 7am).” I don’t know the source of information for that statement. (If anyone else knows, I’d be most grateful if you shared in the comments, so I can update this post!) Honestly, it’s more than possible that CSI has given contradictory information on this subject. But the one place I personally know of a shift start time being given in the show is in Warrick’s statement quoted above.

I also did a general google search on shift times (not specific to CSI or even real-world CSI-type employees). The most common answers I saw were days = 8:00 (or 7:00) a.m. to 4:00 (or 3:00) p.m., swing = 4:00 (or 3:00) p.m. to 12:00 a.m. (or 11:00 p.m.), night/graveyard = 12:00 a.m. (or 11:00 p.m.) to 8:00 (or 7:00) a.m.

In this post on Talk CSI, you can see people trying to answer your question way back in 2006, when the show was airing. One board member there noted that their (forensic, as I understand it) agency had three ten-hour shifts (with two hours of overlap at each end). Another noted that, where they worked (also apparently in the forensic context), the shifts were “12:30 to 8:30, 8:30 to 4:30 and 4:30 to 12:30 working 8 hour shifts.” @figsr kindly advised me that in her (non-forensic) experience shifts would have a half-hour overlap for handover.

I have no personal experience with this, but to me also just logically it would make sense for these shifts to have some sort of overlap for handover—so that, e.g., one team can be dealing with their beginning of shift housekeeping (shifts, assignments, memos from upper management, etc.) while the other is still primarily responsible for calls to the field.

Anyway, based on the above, I can’t give a conclusion on exactly how long the shifts are/when they end. But, as for when the shifts start, my best answer is as given at the top.

The other thing I should probably note here is that the CSIs of CSI do not stop working just because their shifts have ended; when they are in the middle of something that needs to be addressed in a timely manner, they tend to keep going, and they seem to work a lot of double shifts. They also apparently help out other shifts sometimes when necessary. (You’ll note that we see them working during the day a lot, but I don’t know how much of that can be attributed to the issue I discuss below.)

Shift times + scheduling + lack of internal logic (i.e., WTF, CSI?!):

As @addictedtostorytelling discusses in the meta I linked above (which I highly recommend reading, if you’re interested in this topic!), CSI doesn’t make much effort to depict the characters’ work schedules in any sort of realistic way, and drawing inferences about the logistics of the their work schedules is kind of a crapshoot.

Here are a few examples of CSI seeming to ignore its own shift times:

In 01x10, Sara’s asleep with her head on the table in the break room. It’s daylight (looks like morning). She wakes up as the kettle starts whistling. Grissom asks, “Did you sleep here?” Sara responds, “I was working till 4:00 a.m.” —> 4:00 a.m. should be their lunch time. None of this makes any sense.

In 07x08, Sara spends her day waiting to testify in court; they never get to her. Afterwards she goes to talk to Grissom in his office; based on the foregoing it must be late afternoon (maybe around 4:30-5:00 p.m.). Grissom has been working on that episode’s case and must have been on shift since at least the night before. He’s now sitting there reading Thoreau, and she tells him, “I won’t wait up.” —> I know he’s traditionally been a workaholic, and maybe they both have the night off, but it always strikes me as odd (and maybe a bit irresponsible?) that he’s still not heading home, given how long he must have been up and the fact that their usual shift time is in probably close to seven hours (and I always imagine him, as supervisor, arriving early).

At the end of 07x18, the TV reporter says that the suspect confessed earlier that day to the murders of the six showgirls. (The TV newscast is supposedly live, and it’s dark outside where the reporter is. He also states, “The families have organized a candlelight vigil that will begin here tonight.”) Grissom brushes a tear off Sara’s cheek then walks her out of the lab with his arm around her/hand on her back. The hallway has dim lighting and is empty aside from someone (not Natalie Davis!) mopping the floors. It’s giving very “end of the day so the lab’s deserted” vibes. —> But it’s literally never the end of the day there! They work the night shift, and the lab is always humming!

Similarly, in CSIV 1x05, Sara and then Grissom as well (“the matched set”) run into their suspect (Martin Kline) while leaving what is very specifically (i.e., with several establishing shots) shown to be a dark and empty lab. (Like, it’s clearly supposed to feel creepy when Kline first confronts Sara and she’s all alone.) —> But, again, the original CSI showed us that place was never dark and empty! It was always humming!

In 08x01, the security guard at the parking lot from which Sara was abducted says that Sara “eats at the veggie place downstairs a couple times a week.” When Catherine asks when she was there that night, he says, “I don’t know, like 7:30, maybe. That’s when she usually comes.” —> Sara eating at 7:30 p.m. is like someone who works a 9-5 job eating at about 4:30 a.m. (I also feel like their working hours are so erratic that, if she were able to pull off anything regular a couple times per week, it would be something regular she could do with Grissom—like maybe sitting down to a nice relaxed home-cooked rather than take-out meal twice per week.)

Shift times aren’t the only issue, though.

In 02x15, for example, Sara’s “Request for Leave of Absence” form states that her work week is “Tue - Sat grave.” Now, I don’t pay much heed to the CSI props department. (They did give us these nonsensical ID cards, after all.) But this would make a lot of sense to me—the CSIs all having a staggered work week, with two regular, consecutive scheduled days off each. Only . . . we don’t ever really see anything like that?

At the end of 03x22, Sara notes that the schedule says Grissom has the night off, and, when he confirms, she then adds, “Me, too.” It certainly doesn’t sound like this is a regular (weekly) occurrence. But in truth I can’t remember ever actually seeing two of our CSIs have the night off together. We almost never see them having a night off at all. Even in 03x03, when we are told Sara had the night off, it’s in the context of Grissom having called her in to work.

(I think there are a very small number of examples of one of the CSIs actually having a night off—e.g., in 03x09, Catherine has a couple days off but stops by the lab to pick something up for Lindsey’s birthday.)

Admittedly, I get this one, because of course the showrunners want for the most part for the whole cast (especially its major players, the CSIs) to be onscreen throughout every episode. So the subject of days off would have to be fudged. But it strikes me as funny that, in 04x12, when Nick is absent for the entire episode, they don’t take the opportunity to show someone having their regular days off; instead, Sara tells us he’s at the “American Academy of Forensic Science convention” (even though it’s about a month early for the AAFS conference).

Another matter that makes no logistical sense to me is the staffing changes that go on during and immediately after season 05.

In the pilot, the graveyard shift is five CSIs (including Holly Gribbs) plus Brass, who presumably does a lot of paperwork. Then Sara takes Holly’s spot and Brass is transferred out, so it’s just five very qualified CSIs (and no wonder Grissom is always behind on his paperwork, with Brass gone).

By season 5, graveyard shift is up to five and a half CSIs, basically, with Greg’s inclusion as a CSI-in-training. Then Ecklie decides to mix things up (i.e., punish Grissom and his pals), and he splits them into two shifts, adding only Sofia (to the graveyard shift). So then graveyard has three and a half CSIs (four once Greg makes CSI I), and swing shift has three CSIs. In 05x11, Ecklie acknowledges swing shift is short a couple bodies and blames budget constraints. But, if swing shift is short a couple bodies, graveyard shift must be short a body, too, even once Greg makes CSI I. How can budget constraints suddenly necessitate them being down that many bodies—especially when by season six Ecklie can somehow justify letting them now have six full CSIs on graveyard shift? Also, we know the swing shift supervisor was transferred to days to replace Ecklie, but what happened to the rest of the previous swing shift?

Now, my petty headcanon would be that the entire day shift save for Sofia quits when Ecklie gets promoted because the thought of him as assistant lab director is unbearable to them, as a result of which he moves the entire swing shift to days and pretends the staff shortages are due to budget cuts. But I find it kind of funny (again!) that, during the fifth season, when CSI really was on top of the world (e.g., ratings, cast winning the SAG award, Tarantino directing “Grave Danger”), the showrunners couldn’t at least have found a couple warm bodies to show up occasionally to round out the swing shift (even if Ecklie was punishing Grissom and his shift by leaving the graveyard shift understaffed). (In 05x16, Catherine is shown talking to three randoms in “forensics” coveralls, one of whom calls her “boss,” but no explanation is given as to who they are, and I think that’s the most we ever see in that regard.)

Anyway, thank you so much for your question, and my apologies for rambling with some of my CSI logistics grievances. My best answer to your question is as given at the top. If you should have another question, please feel free to send it my way—barring any acts of God, etc. (unforeseeable future events), I will most almost certainly be able to manage a more prompt response!

[twig-gy]

tumblr could be so much better of a website. here’s (some of) what i’d add:

- add basic search operators like without, precise quotes, search by username, only ones with these tags, and other suchlike. make these work on your blog search too. also fix popular to actually be highest notes to lowest and fix whatever is going on w the chrono

- make settings just. more sensible in general?

- remove paid badges, make them all free, also achievement badges. put something in settings to where badges will not display or be visible in any way and will not be read out on screen readers

- fix Whatever Is Up with alts while i’m here

- be able to give titles to any user. also have categories for them, so you can have Trusted Mutuals or like Best CCCC Posters n suchlike

- make it so you can see which titles you’ve been given (maybe not by who just for funsies) unless it’s been marked private

- automatically sort followers into groups by follow time, such as ‘0-2 Weeks, 2 Weeks-1 Month’, etc. also do this for mutuals. and then be able to pick which stat is more important or show both

- sort which groups of users can see or interact with a certain post, for example, only your Trusted Mutuals can see your ventpost now. also do this for tags so you can have a ‘#trusted mutuals only’ tag

- also you can sort your notifs by the user categories so you might only see your notes from your mutuals or whatever you want

- give your blog a theme song that plays whenever someone scrolls it unless they disable theme songs in settings.

- add MORE sound effects like the messaging ones. i want a sparkle sound when i like a post

- in settings there should be a dial for how many sound effects you want from ‘zero’ to ‘please give me random jackpot sfx’

- make everyone put in a headnoun and then enable/disable the sitelen pona of that headnoun showing before their username

- make fun autocorrect to musi /joke

[antitheticaldreamgirl-13]

I wrote this thingy…it’s like a Taylor 101 for people who hate her. I would love any comments/suggestions that would make it better!:

So, Taylor Swift. Let’s talk about her.

People say she is ditzy and stuck writing songs about her long list of ex-boyfriends. Her music is meaningless, popular but not spectacular in any way.

Hmm. That is actually a quite strange point of view.

She’s won 12 Grammys and been nominated for 46. She’s the most awarded artist in the American Music Awards and received more Billboard Music Awards than any other woman. She has won 23 MTV Awards, second only to Beyonce. 

But, sure, she’s just an idiot who only writes shallow pop songs. That makes tons of sense. (As you can see, I have no patience for Taylor-haters). 

Now, you might argue that these awards are often rigged and not a true marker of musical quality. You might argue that, for some unknown reason, most of us have been put under a magical spell, rendering us incapable of realizing the utter lack of quality of Taylor’s music. You’ve listened to perhaps five of her songs at best, and are more qualified to judge her excellence than any person well-versed in Taylor’s discography and certainly more knowledgeable than musical experts.  

Sorry to burst your bubble, but that’s not how it works. In fact, perhaps before declaring that Taylor Swift’s music is garbage, you could actually listen to it and try to, although perhaps uncomfortably, push through your instinct to hate it. Listen to her album Folklore (which, by the way, won Album of the Year), or Evermore, or any of her other albums. You may be surprised to hear this, but she has written more songs than Bad Blood and Shake It Off. Crazy, I know. 

Examples of her lyrics:

“I want auroras and sad prose / I want to watch wisteria grow right over my bare feet

/ 'Cause I haven't moved in years.” - Lakes

“I’d meet you where the spirit meets the bones / In a faith forgotten land / In from the snow / your touch brought forth an incandescent glow / tarnished but so grand.” -Ivy

“If clarity's in death, then why won't this die? / Years of tearing down our banners, you and I / Living for the thrill of hitting you where it hurts / Give me back my girlhood, it was mine first.” -Would’ve, Could’ve, Should’ve

“You drew stars around my scars / But now I’m bleeding.” -Cardigan

“From when your Brooklyn broke my skin and bones / I'm a soldier who's returning half her weight / And did the twin flame bruise paint you blue? / Just between us, did the love affair maim you too? / 'Cause in this city's barren cold / I still remember the first fall of snow / And how it glistened as it fell / I remember it all too well.” - All Too Well

“Now I'm searching for signs in a haunted club / Our songs, our films, united we stand / Our country, guess it was a lawless land / Quiet my fears with the touch of your hand / Paper cut stings from my paper-thin plans.” -Death by a Thousand Cuts

These quotes are from 5 separate albums and are only a few of the many examples I could pull out. But yeah. She’s a horrible songwriter.

One might argue that most are uneducated and have only listened to her most famous hits, and I would completely agree. But, might I add that….her hits are not bad? Sure, Shake It Off and Bad Blood are definitely not her best ones, but what about Cruel Summer? Lover? Style? These are in no way bad. 

For example, here are some Cruel Summer lyrics:

“So cut the headlights, summer's a knife / I'm always waiting for you just to cut to the bone / Devils roll the dice, angels roll their eyes / And if I bleed, you'll be the last to know.”

Ummm..are these horrible lyrics? Hardly. The music itself, separate from the lyrics, is also good, so what exactly is the objection?

The Objection: It doesn’t matter if her individual lyrics are better than most songwriters out there, I’m annoyed that she’s talking about ex-boyfriends because I’m a sexist jerk!

Hmm. Perhaps this is just me, but I don’t find that argument particularly convincing.

Let me frame it this way. If I were to ask you What’s wrong with writing about breakups, about falling in love, about one of the most beautiful aspects of life?, what would you say? There is no concrete answer to this question.

And, anyhow, that’s the genius of Taylor Swift: while a majority of her songs are about relationships (although by no means all or even close to all), she writes about them in a different way each time. What does it matter if a songwriter talks about, say, the meaning of life but the way the meaning of life is discussed is utterly simplistic and cliche? We would discard it, call it garbage. More than anything, the way a songwriter writes the individual lyrics is more important than the overall topic.

The irony comes in when people claim that Taylor Swift is simplistic and one-dimensional, and yet the way people view her is just as simplistic and one-dimensional. They’ve listened to about five of her songs, from perhaps two or three of her albums, and then they proclaim she is bad. Meanwhile, they also claim that all her songs are simply meant for commercial success. Clearly, if one only listens to her most successful hits, then they could be excused for not knowing she writes songs that are not simply meant to appeal to the masses (although…like I said…her hits aren’t bad). They say she is bad because her hits are bad, and yet they are the ones who are focusing on her hits. Do they not realize the hypocrisy of this? 

Furthermore, why are we so averse to having fun? Why are we so afraid of anything not highly intellectual? If a song sounds good, why must we label it bad? Lyrics matter, yes, but what does it say about ourselves if we must constantly be original, unique, clever, philosophical? Are we really trying to learn, to think, to enjoy the complexity of the world, or are we, rather, trying to ignore our deepest fears, our insecurities, that tells us we must prove ourselves to the world? Not everything needs to be smart, and certainly not everything needs to be changed to seem complex. We supposedly view simple facts in a complex way so as to avoid dumbing down the truth, so as to avoid making the truth a piece of entertainment devoid of meaning, and yet, isn’t the act of complicating what does not need to be complicated so often the root of frivolous entertainment?  In fact, I would argue that Taylor’s best lyrics are often the simplest ones, ones that are direct and, as she would say, “cut to the bone.”

If you, dear reader, are a Taylor-hater, may I ask why? Which singers are you listening to instead who are so clearly superior to her? Name them for me. We’ll compare them to Taylor Swift. It’ll be fun.

Actually, I already regret saying this. I can already hear people screaming out the absolute best artists and songwriters of all time—John Lennon, Bob Dylan, Joni Mitchell. Please. Why are acting so all-or-nothing, so black and white? To quote Taylor herself, stop “Comparing all the girls who are killin’ it.” Nuance. It’s a thing.

But, of course, is Taylor Swift so below these famous, incredibly culturally-impactful singers? Of course not. The point is that even if she was, that doesn’t automatically make her bad. After all, if everyone besides Michael Jackson was bad, then Michael Jackson wouldn’t have been incredible. Logic. It’s a thing.

Don’t get me wrong—I’m not expecting everyone to love Taylor Swift or even simply like her. But I do expect people not to call her garbage regularly simply because they don’t feel like listening to anything beyond Bad Blood or simply because they can’t stand successful women or simply because they think she’s a slut. Some people just don’t like her style of music, but they should be able to respect her songwriting prowess. 

So, I’m asking, when you hear someone dissing her, don’t agree with them.

So, I’m asking, when you hear Taylor Swift on the radio, swallow your instinct to groan to everyone around about how horrible you think she is. 

So, I’m asking, to examine your motives for hating her and perhaps admit to yourself that your beliefs about her come more from a place of ignorance or even sexism than a true dislike of her music.

[quaranmine]

You put so much research and detail into Incandescence of a Dying Light and it's amazing. Do you have any tips for someone trying to research for a story? One of my characters is an elderly Floridian lifeguard but the best sources I can find are some NYT articles about Long Island lifeguards

Oh thank you! I appreciate that.

As for researching, I think the best way to go about it is to try to research specific parts of your problem. You might not be able to find resources for an elderly Floridian lifeguard, but you can probably find resources for lifeguards, lifeguards in a particular area, and elderly people doing swimming/rescues. I can try to give you some pointers but without knowing your story or specific needs some of these tips might not work. Just use them as a jumping off point! Specific problems can be easier to research than broad problems--unless it's too specific, and then you lose all your results. Researching is a balancing act between those two.

Are they a lifeguard at the ocean, or a pool? If it's the ocean, where in Florida? I'd look up information about the sea currents in that area. That might give you an idea of the kind of risks your lifeguard is looking at, like if they work at a beach in a place known for rip currents or something. That will add some realism and you can probably find resources on what your lifeguard character is looking for. If it's a pool, your job is probably much easier because I have to assume most of the same rules apply for elsewhere.

Is there a specific time period you are looking at? I'm no lifeguard, so anyone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I imagine the profession hasn't changed very much in the past few decades or longer. If someone is a lifeguard in the 80s my gut feeling is that their job is still pretty similar to what it is today. So, that might make your research easier if you can expand the time periods you are looking at. My story is set in 1989 so I'm always looking for info from that time period. But most of what I'm doing is looking at fire lookout resources from the 50s or early 2000s, and then matching the technology in my fic to the late 80s.

I would also look up things like lifeguard handbook, lifeguard skills, lifeguard employee handbook, lifeguard training materials, etc. For example, just by looking up "florida lifeguard" I found the Jacksonville Beach Ocean Rescue Lifeguard Academy, which gives some details about the requirements and steps to become a lifeguard there. Could be useful information. I also found a 400 page Red Cross lifeguarding manual pdf. For more personal information, perhaps add stuff like "interview" to the search? I'm sure you would be able to find people talking about their jobs.

As for your character's age, that might not require much research. Being older does not mean a character can't be fit or strong (but I don't know if you mean 60 or 90 when you say "elderly" and that matters.) You could explore sources about active elderly people too, if you wanted. This will just depend on the details of your character though.

I would also recommend using some advanced search techniques. For example, if you only want examples about Florida, write it as "florida" with the quotes around it, and you'll only receive pages that contain the word Florida. Or, if you want to exclude something that is muddying your search results, put the word with a minus. Tragically at one point during my chapter 8 research i had to add -maui to the search to try and exclude news articles associated with it.

Generally though I would just look for lots of sources of many types, and then add them together. It is unlikely you will find sources that match everything you need. Break down what you need to know into smaller pieces. I may have 20+ tabs open for information that amounts to....a few paragraphs. Vary your search queries a lot, try different key words. My research for Firewatch AU has been helped by the fact that the job involves the federal government, which is great at recordkeeping and often has a lot of publicly available information. Your mileage may vary with other subjects. Watch your sources for accuracy. Or, if you rely on sources from a different location (Long Island vs Florida) be prepared to try and identify and fill in the gaps where there are differences between the locations.

Good luck!

[lilianne-tarot]

How the Universe Has Its Way of Guiding You, and That's Okay

TW: LONG POST

I have always trusted in the universe's plan in every step of my life. When things took an ugly turn for me, when I failed at things I thought I was the best at, when I couldn’t get the things I was desperate for, I questioned the universe, "Whyyy mee?" but We, as humans, tend to run after things that feel out of our reach. A lot of us chase things, even the wrong things sometimes. But the reality is universe gives us what we need, not what we want, and that’s the difference. We often realize this too late in our journey.

A very cliché quote, "Every rejection is a redirection," is what I live by. Another famous quote from a writer says, "If things go according to your wishes, that's good. But if they go according to God's will, that's even better because it is happening the way He wants, and God will never wish anything bad for you." My mom taught me this very early in life and I reminded it to myself every time I hit rock bottom.

I have always been very intuitively blessed, and even when things were about to take a turn for me, I could feel it coming. A perfect example of how the universe gives signals in the most unexpected ways happened 2 months ago ago. I was in an awful situation, really fighting for something, feeling desperate, so I resorted to my love, my tarot cards, for guidance. As I pulled the cards, I did it multiple times because our energy really affects the cards we draw, and I was confused and anxious. But one thing kept happening: the World card kept appearing in my readings, whether through jumper cards, as a shadow card, or just somehow showing up every time.

Even though I know the meanings of my cards well, being human, I needed reassurance. So, I searched through my books, and internet, found the meaning, but left it there and went on with my day. Later that day, I randomly opened this app and saw a post explaining, "What does it mean when the World card shows up multiple times in a reading?" The moment I read that post, I had the biggest breakdown. It was like the universe was speaking directly to me, showing me how miraculously and unexpectedly it sends signals. And last week I passed the test successfully. I am finally eligible for the course I badly wanted to attend. Ultimately, the universe wasn’t lying that day. I was grinning ear to ear when I saw my results. The power the universe holds is beyond our contemplation.

The way I write my readings, I heavily credit my loneliness and ADHD for it. Funny, isn’t it? Personally, even though I have always had really supportive friends, I never had someone I could connect with on a soul level and share my deepest thoughts with. So, I resorted to journaling and talking to myself. I used to take night walks just to let out all of my thoughts to my invisible friend who would never judge me.

Two years ago, I got really serious about my tarot hobby when I was super burdened with my studies and other stuff. I started asking questions about myself and writing my own interpretations in my diary, the way I wished someone would tell me those things. I would reread them later, and that became my little comfort, even if I exaggerated things there but it gave me the happiness I was looking for at that time. Over time, my style evolved. I got better at reading the cards, better at articulating my thoughts, and when I started doing readings for others, I saw the impact it had. When people told me, "This made my heart warm," or "This gave me so much clarity," I felt so proud to be able to do that for others.

One fine day, I stumbled upon this community, completely out of the blue. The funny part is I didn’t even expect this app to have a tarot community, LOL. But when I found it, I binge-read so many posts here. And then an idea struck me: "What if I share my own readings here?" So, I made my blog. Unexpectedly, I received so much love, more than I ever imagined. It might sound like an exaggeration, but I truly feel like I found my soul family here.

None of this was planned. And that’s exactly how the universe works. It guides us in ways we don’t always see at first. Sometimes, we’re too focused on what we think we want that we don’t recognize what we truly need. But the universe has its way of showing us, through signs, through redirections, through moments of clarity that hit us unexpectedly. And when we finally look back, we realize that everything was aligning perfectly all along.

i hope i was able to bring some reassurance and comfort to anyone who might be going thorough a rough time and looking for a signal from the universe. 💗

With love, Lilianne.

Masterlist ⭑ Paid services ⭑ Ko-Fi

[jewelhousechandigarh19]

Turning Gold into Wealth: Top Tips for Cash for Gold

Ever get that sudden jolt of curiosity over that old gold jewelry stuck in your drawer? You know, the pieces that haven't seen the light of day in years? It may be a family heirloom that does not fit your style or something you don't wear anymore. Guess what? That gold may be your hidden treasure! Or could it be time to lay your hands on that dormant gold you have lying there? Lucky for you, Chandigarh is gold buying heaven.

But having an abundance of gold buyers; how will you know with whom to trust the giving of the right price for your gold? Well, let me tell you, I am here to help, and this guide is for what: the best cash for gold near me in Chandigarh. Let us get started!

Why Choose Chandigarh to Sell Your Gold for Cash?

Chandigarh is known for its planned urban landscape and vibrant culture. Chandigarh offers the highest rates of precious gold traders within the respective town. Having many significant jewelers with gold collectors creates extensive competition advantageous to you while selling. 

It makes the scope of range more versatile, as prices would be considerably better off compared to lesser towns like Panchkula, Zirakpur or so. Furthermore, Chandigarh is associated with tight regulatory laws when it comes to selling precious gold against instant cash.

What to Look for in a Gold Buyer?

When you're looking for a place to sell gold, trust is paramount. Here are a few things to keep in mind:

Reputation: Seek out established businesses with a strong track record. Look for online reviews and testimonials from previous customers. Don't hesitate to ask friends and family for recommendations, too!

Transparency: A reputable buyer will openly explain their evaluation process, including how they determine the gold's purity and weight. They should be upfront about their pricing structure and any associated fees.

Current Prices: Gold prices fluctuate daily, so make sure the buyer uses the current market rate. You can easily check live gold prices online before you head out.

Customer Service: Choose a buyer who is willing to answer your questions patiently and provides excellent customer service. After all, you deserve a smooth and hassle-free experience!

Types of Gold You Can Sell

You might be surprised by the variety of gold items you can sell. From jewelry to coins, here are a few examples:

Gold Jewelry: This includes rings, necklaces, earrings, bracelets, bangles, and even old gold watches.

Gold Coins: Many people invest in gold coins. If you have any lying around, they can be a good source of quick cash.

Gold Bars: These are often considered a more serious investment, but if you're looking to liquidate assets, gold bars are definitely sellable.

Tips for Selling Your Gold

Ready to turn that gold into cash? Here are a few tips to help you get the best deal:

Get Multiple Quotes: Don't settle for the first offer you receive. Shop around and get quotes from several old gold buyers in Chandigarh to compare prices.

Know Your Gold's Purity: Before you visit a buyer, determine the karat (e.g., 24K, 22K, 18K) of your gold. This will give you a better understanding of its value.

Clean Your Gold: Give your gold a quick clean before you have it appraised. This can make a slight difference in the evaluation.

Bring Identification: Most buyers will require a valid form of identification for security and legal purposes.

Find the Best Cash for Gold in Chandigarh Today! Stop letting your unused gold gather dust. With just a little preparation, you can turn it into instant cash. Start your search for a reliable buyer now and uncover the hidden value in your jewelry. Visit Jewel House for a free appraisal and the best offers in town!

[osterby]

Constructing effective searches is a skill that was taught to me by librarians at the public library and by my father (a programmer), which I then honed on my own as I explored the internet as a teenager. Up through like 2010ish, this was an essential skill for doing anything at all on the internet.

And then Google got better.

In the olden days, you had to put recipe "french toast" in the search bar, quotes and all, to get a bunch of french toast recipies on the first page, but Google improved and was able to give reasonable search results to people to entered how do I make french tost?, with a question mark and a typo and without quotes.

This was a good thing, it meant that casual users (including your granny and your kid sister) could use a search engine and get what they were looking for without having to understand how computers think and without having to isolate the keywords themselves. And french toast recipes are a very simple example, Google's improvements also meant that people could use natural language to search for images, news articles, and location- or time-relevant information; you could search pictures of cats, what were last week's sportball scores? or weather warnings near me and get what you were acutally looking without having to use special search parameters.

This was a meaningful improvement that meant that a lot more people could use search engines, and thus the internet, effectively without having to learn special skills, but it also meant that the average internet user who was just here for recipes and cat pictures and sportball news no longer had the special skills needed for searching a lot of more specific websites. If you want Ever Given/Suez Canal fanfic, you can just type where do I read evergiven fanfic? into Google and the first result is the ship tag on AO3.

But if you want to search AO3 itself and narrow down that tag, you can't just type questions and requests into the search bar, you will have to teach yourself how to actually use a search.

The same is true for places like Twitter, Youtube, any wiki, Amazon and other online stores, your local library's website, The Internet Archive, Pixiv, Deviantart, all those image boorus, heck, even Pornhub. You can even search the backlog of that stupid Discord server that makes you join because they forgot what a wiki is. Some (like AO3) have very good search functionality and extensively tagged content, others are janky and bare bones or fiddle around with your keywords on the back end and mix in suggested crapola, but they've all got search functions that you can learn to use to find the specific thing you're actually looking for. (Tumblr is excluded from this list; no amount of searching skills will save you from their inability to index their own site)

I feel like I need to end this with a simple lesson on how you, too, can put together a better search query, but it really has been over two decades and I don't really remember how I learned all this in the first place.

But to give you the basics: 1.) Approach it as searching for where a specific word or phrase appears, not as requesting a type of thing. eg you are searching AO3 for instances of the tag trans!Jaskier, you are not asking a robot for Witcher fic where Jaskier is trans,

2.) Take some time to explore a website's advanced search page. Click around and see what the options are, read the tooltips (if you're on mobile, long pressing on something will usually bring up a tooltip that mousing over on a desktop does), check out what kinds of things get autofilled where, and if there's no good tutorial and the descriptions aren't very clear, just fool around with searches until you figure out what does what.

3.) Many search boxes, even on fancy modern websites, will accept a few basic boolean operators. If you're not sure if a website you use a lot takes them, it's worth testing it out. "Boolean operators" sounds like scary programmer-speak, but they're actually pretty easy. Here are some of the more useful and easily remembered operators.

- the minus sign is probably the one I use the most often, and is something that more websites seem to accept. It simply excludes the minused word. french -toast will turn up "french vocabulary practice" and will not show you "Grandma's best French toast recipe". Use this one to list all your squicks.

Enclosing something in quotaton marks will search for that exact string; "french toast" looks for things that have those exact two words in that exact order.

AND will search for things that have both the terms: french AND toast searches for anything that has those two words, in any order. The phrase "a toast to the French army" and "Grandma's best French toast recipe" will both show up with an AND search.

OR essentially performs two searches at once. french OR toast will turn up any mention of either word, you'll get "hot buttered toast" and "french vocabulary practice" with an OR search.

The asterisk is a wildcard. Trans* will turn up any word that starts with those five letters, including "transgender", "transsexual", "transition", "transcontinental", "transmission", and "trans*" itself.

And finally, AO3 has a lot of their very own search operators that let you narrow your search by pretty much any criteria you can think of https://archiveofourown.org/admin_posts/10851

thinking about that post of people assuming ao3 has an algorithm and also about how bonkers persistent the view is that ao3 is social media lite. like with startling regularity I get comments saying something along the lines of "it's probably weird to comment on a fic this old--" no it isn't!!!! this is an archive I am literally just assuming you searched for a selection of specific tags or sorted by kudos or looked back on my pseud or any other number of completely normal ways to use an archive site ?? kill the tiktok ghost in your brain and comment on old stuff it's NOT weird

[kavrillia]

A Pain of Thrones

(Yeah, I went there.)

ARGGGH I'm thisclose to giving up and not naming the throne of the Lanarian Empire, after all. Everything I Google is already taken, sounds stupid, or has connotations I don't want.

"Sapphire Throne" would be perfect but apparently that's a biblical thing.

Azerite is really soft and not suitable to build anything out of, and doesn't age well.

Tri-moon was some social media celeb in the wrestling fandom who died to suicide. Triple Moon brings up all kinds of neopagan stuff.

"Pearl Throne" mostly brings up ads for drum accessories, and obits for old ladies with that as their actual name. A few fictional universes use the term, but not any that seem super well-known. So that's not completely out of the realm of possibility, I guess.

"Triple Pearl Throne" brings no search results (with quotes around it,) but strikes me as too wordy. Ditto for Tri-Pearl Throne. Regardless, those don't work well because Kavrillia basically has the equivalent of Earth's Moon, plus Mars' Phobos and Deimos. Only one resembles a pearl.

Nacre or Nacreous Throne isn't horrible, but doesn't thrill me, either. Pearlescent Throne is okay-ish. But it's not like the whole thing is iridescent, just the trim, so that imagery doesn't really do it for me.

I even entertained the idea of grekk teeth being incorporated into the throne somehow, as they can't be killed by Kavrillians, and a dead one washing up is considered a good omen in Lanarian culture. So Melsar the Conqueror could have found one in his travels and claimed some of the teeth. A grekk's jaw wouldn't even fit in the throne room, but a fang or two would--or they could cut off part of one to make it fit better. But what would that be called? The Grekk Tooth Throne is silly. Grekk's Fang Throne sounds more like an orc thing. Grekk's Bite? Grekk's Edge? Throne of Pearl and Fang? No. Just no.

(I've noticed soooooo many fantasy novels lately with titles in the format of "A ______ of _______ and ______." I don't know if it started with A Song of Ice and Fire, but there are a ton out there. At least my working title is "The _____ of ______." Totally different. Heh.)

Sigh.

I just thought it would be a cool bit of worldbuilding to have the Lanarian throne be named, especially since a major plot thread is the struggle to seize and reclaim said throne.

Maybe it's not that big a deal, since the actual throne is only used for photo ops in modern times, and it's the desk and office chair that hold the power now. I suppose I could follow the example of the White House's Resolute Desk and name that, but it's only a few hundred years old and not nearly as symbolic as The Throne.

And arguably the most famous real-world monarchy still in power is the British one, and their throne doesn't have a name as far as I know.

...

It's a good thing nobody reads this blog because if you were judging my writing based on these stream-of-consciousness brainstorming rambles, you'd never want to read the actual book. LOL

[seoconsultant-1]

Using Technology In The Classroom - Is The Operation Is Happening?

As technical and complicated as it sounds, the interactive board is actually easy and fun the. Basically if you know the way to use a mouse on the computer, could certainly operate it with relief. It is used with a projector and a laptop. On this board, one make use of a pen or obviously any good finger to activate with you will find that or the board. Associated with the computer and to be able to data and software can be done on this board. Using its viewable size, it excellent for to be utilized in classrooms, board rooms, training rooms and the like.

Don't neglect the basics. Being a speaker our role would be entertain, motivate, inspire, persuade, cajole or inform an audience. No matter the sophistication of the application we have at our finger tips the prime role we play is not different. If for example the software gets in the way of our main role we ought to not the idea. All the speaker techniques and effects remain totally applicable when PowerPoint can be.

I possess a friend who works for the Vietnam office of an english architectural firm and he was quoted saying their counterparts in England were worried that the Vietnamese staff might not be able to open the AutoCAD documents they sent, because surely the Vietnamese end up being using some ancient version. In fact, because among the lax enforcement of copyright laws, the exact opposite was true. The Vietnam office had the latest version, whereas the British office only had a mature version! Since all geared towards software is actually free inside Vietnam, it is common for customers to have $20,000 worth of software to their computers, or maybe more.

Take a search at the traffic police. Here in Vietnam your traffic cop lacks the radio, no computer, many don't have guns. Technique often be pacified by using a hundred-thousand Dong ($6). Found an ordinary policeman contains fast car with a working computer and is armed to your teeth. Disobey one small traffic law and instantly your entire criminal record is to the screen.

Marilyn Snyder is the "PowerPoint Lovely women." She reinvents PowerPoint slides for her clients and makes them come interactive projector living. She showed us the pros and cons, outdated and new methods to give with impact using this Microsoft package.

Make sure you stick to a stupid layout just because this is the it's always done in your organisation. And also include the projector and screen making the vast majority of the space, along with the speaker, the one that actually provides deliver the material, squeezed to one for whites of area. You might also consider overheating area to certain by mid afternoon qualification is going to meltdown. Oh, and absolutely ensure there is one of the above you "U" shaped tables set-ups. You know the sort, where individuals on one side get cricks in their neck, along with the people in the strain their eyes discover you. On no account think about altering this room to something a good deal more involving, interactive or conducive to a gathering.

You should check the market thoroughly before you choose to buy such solutions. You should check on the advantages you usually receive throughout the item and the variance from the price associated with the package. You should try to get the best product at most affordable benefit.

Attention-grabbing skills are your tool for helping the target audience tune interested in your matter. These skills for grabbing audience attention is not about your ego, you're just helping them to tune wearing. When you have something worthwhile saying, also as your audience consider you're actually guiding them and helping them focus on your topic, they will appreciate this and reward you with eager attention and active participation. Then at finish you will feel elated as they clap to exhibit their knowledge.