#anya taylor-joy wallpapers

[fuckwallpapers]

[lokcscreen]

the menu (2022) - dir. mark mylod.

[seulcaty]

  𐚁 ꫬ   ۪   joy ( red velvet ) lockscreen

[natromanovxx]

I created an extended version of this picture if anyone wants a new phone wallpaper ~~

Also traced Furiosa's starmap tattoo from a screencap if anyone wants it for reference <3

[prplocks]

♡☆♡ the witch wallpaper

reblog if you save ▪︎

-----------------------------------------------------------

[cutyourprettylips]

ᡣ𐭩 •｡ꪆৎ ˚⋅

[mockscreens]

please like/reblog if you save!

more emma 2020 lockscreens here!

[emmania]

My new wallpaper

[diesemn]

my fav work:3

[wallpapers4screen]

[theindustrycalledrap]

[lovelyladiesedits]

[lyankascorner]

“The strongest person is the person who isn’t scared to be alone.”

The Queen’s Gambit, Walter Tevis

[emmersreads]

Emma by Jane Austen | 2.5/5

I have been sitting on this negative review of Emma for over a year so pls pretend I am charmingly tortured by my mixed feelings for this beloved classic rather than just a little hater.

I decided to read Emma because the Austen girlies are unstoppable. Every day I wake up for my twelve hour shift in the content mines of tumblr.fuck (for the purpose of this sentence we are both grizzled elderly men sitting on a porch just go with it) and find another post about how Jane Austen is the best thing since before sliced bread. Eat your heart out Shakespeare; if only you’d done all your plays about falling in love. These posts are a bit of a mindfuck for me because as much as I love a costume drama, Austen’s actual novels have always been underwhelming. One of my best friends is an Austen girlie. She loves the things. I dunno man, these books do not spark joy. But maybe I was just young dumb and a hater. Emma (2020) is my favourite Austen movie, so when I decided to reinvestigate the author I thought I’d start there.

The movie is better than the book. Shocked gasps; questions asked at parliament.

Emma (2020) is a great adaptation in part because it’s well positioned to keep the best parts of the book. My favourite part of the novel was the dialogue, which the film is able to lift often ad verbatim (“Mother, you simply must sample the tart!”). The patter of conversation is excellent and Austen’s sense of humor comes across just as effectively on the page as it does when spoken aloud. To this the visual medium can add the incredible set design, including the beautiful Regency wallpapers, Emma’s many jackets and little hats, Anya Taylor Joy’s eyes that look like they’re exes trying awkwardly to avoid each other in the grocery store, Johnny Flynn as Mr. Knightley having a romantic tantrum so intense he has to take his pants off and lie on the floor. Relatable. These elements couldn’t be in the book even if Ms. Austen had wanted to describe Mr. Knightley’s buttock-baring emotion.

Unfortunately that paragraph has been my way of damning with faint praise. The inverse proposition of an adaptation that adds a lot of things I liked is the source material without much to like about it. This is a bit of a misrepresentation. I found most of the book to be funny and enjoyable in much the same vein of the movie: a gorgeously decorated vanilla sponge cake. I just hated the ending so much it retroactively ruined all 500 previous pages.

I don’t begrudge Ms. Austen’s choice to hew to the Georgian standards of propriety (hence no ass shots), but this is a safe space for us to admit that those standards have not all aged particularly well, or particularly sexily. I feel like I’ve been infected with terminal bookstagram brainworms. I also don’t want to be here arguing that a book published two hundred years ago is too old-fashioned for me. But at the same time so much of the narrative about Austen is a revisionist history of how all her work was secretly not only meaningful (this is true, Austen’s work is about capturing the atmosphere and concerns of a particular social milieu, which she does effectively; it’s not less worthy of capture because it’s a space exclusive to women), but progressive.

People love Austen. They love romance and they love period drama. They don’t love when that genre is criticized for being dated or regressive. I understand that people do not read these books for the 21st century social commentary or the politics. And I understand that a 21st century moral critique is ahistorical and in poor faith. Trust me, I feel the ‘just let people have fun’ brigade hanging over my head like the sword of fucking Damocles.

But here’s the thing folks, my largely pretty enjoyable read of Emma was soured by just that: important parts of it are dated and regressive and it ruined my day.

The premise of Emma is that the titular protagonist is a rich and witty young woman intent on meddling in the romantic lives of others, at their expense. At the conclusion of the film, Emma realizes she has behaved badly to her lower class friend Harriet by leading Harriet to overlook the farmer Robert Martin (Harriet’s social equal) in order to pursue the richer Mr. Erlton (her social superior). Emma apologizes to Harriet and tells her to reconsider her feelings for Robert Martin, which turn out to be genuine. Finally, when Harriet discovers that her father is a lower class merchant rather than a secret aristocrat, Emma says she will welcome Harriet into Hartfield anyway. It indicates that Emma has outgrown her judgemental nature and preoccupation with appropriate matches to see Harriet as a friend in spite of her being Emma’s social inferior. And they all live happily ever after.

In the novel, this resolution takes much much longer. Emma’s flaw is not that she toyed with her friend’s emotions to arrange a match that amused her, but that she encouraged Harriet to have uppity opinions and to seek to rise above her station. The story resolves with Emma and Harriet returning to their proper social classes, Emma with Mr. Knightley and Harriet with Robert Martin. Emma and Mr. Knightley commiserate over how foolish Emma was to befriend Harriet and how unpleasant Harriet has become now that she is a social climber, and Harriet is revealed to have been naturally ungrateful and grasping and unworthy of a young lady such as Emma’s friendship.

I’m not going to waste my time on whether this sort of thing was just as bad then as it is now or whether it was simple a different time. Austen’s writing is a reflection of genuinely (though not universally) held societal beliefs and she’s not going to rise from the grave to change it now. It is, however, a deeply unpleasant ending. Emma’s problem isn’t that she toys with the people around her for entertainment, but that she doesn’t participate appropriately in the class system. Technically both of these are about becoming more self-reflective and more thoughtful of others, but the devil is in the details. It’s hard to enjoy that as the conclusion to a romantic comedy. I don’t come to Austen for a window into the uncomfortable realities of the past, or really any particular connection to the past. I’m here for the fluffy romance.

Part of the reason talking about not enjoying Austen because of these novels’ dated elements is so frustrating is that the common narrative about Austen is super revisionist. Austen has endured a lot of lumps and I do think it’s stupid to claim that she was a poor writer and was incapable of writing incisive social commentary just because she was a woman writing about the recency woman’s interests and concerns. I also think it’s reductive to claim that the social dynamics of Austen’s world often get misinterpreted due to the modern reflex to see every society preceding our own as nasty, brutish, and short. But this isn’t a critique of Austen, this is a critique of reading Austen in 2023. It’s not just about hating to see a grilboss winning.

On the other hand, why do I feel like I’m trying to placate the ‘just let people enjoy things’ brigade again?

One of the most frustrating things about being generally a romance disliker is the climate of toxic positivity that surrounds any genre that is more about having fun than any ostensibly higher purposes. There is a sense that since the audience of these genres is primarily women and they are often targeted by bad faith misogynistic criticisms, that any criticism of them is inherently misogynistic. I’ve been tying myself up in knots because my observation is that a book from 1815 has some nineteenth century ass ideas about class. This should be self-evident. ‘Just enjoying things’ in not actually my goal when reading, and ‘just letting people enjoy things’ isn’t my goal as a critic either.

Here’s the rub: Emma is a fun and sweet romantic comedy with some of the English language’s best dialogue until the conclusion reminds us that there hasn’t ever been a romantic utopia with the sexy historical codes of practise but not the bad ones. Romance in Austen’s time was a function of the class system, not separate from it. And I don’t know, maybe I’m the patron saint of it really being that deep, but I had a hard time seeing the lighthearted romance in that.

[prplocks]

✧❁ wallpaper 〴 anya taylor joy ˗ˏˋ ´ˎ˗

reblog if you save ➳

༶•┈┈┈┈┈┈୨♡୧┈┈┈┈┈•༶

[people-of-the-stars]

Anya Taylor Joy.

Ariana Grande.

Chloe Grace Moretz.

Beautiful Wallpapers. Photo Gallery 4k hd.