#i guess i'm passionate (?) about this

[zarla-s]

Both Kabu and Larry have resting grump faces but they're misleading! Kabu's very friendly and laughs easily, and Larry is polite (if very tired) and even treats you to a meal after you beat his gym. It's just very cute to me.

[patreon]

[oshisaure]

this is giving me a couple thoughts that seem opposite at first but i don't think they are

- on the one hand, you are unique, and so is the combination of the things you know and the way you relate to them, and so making something based on those means you can combine things in a way that only you can think of

- on the other hand, sometimes an idea like "what if [thing i like] but..." is enough of a drive to make something different enough to be its own thing. your takes are your own and if you make your own take on something that's still creating

i think the main thing here is that creating isn't about finding truly new and original things, since those don't really exist, but rather it's about you taking things and making something else with them. it's self expression of your ideas and it's about putting a touch of you in the things you make and put out there in the world. if they're you, they're unique, because you're unique in your own way.

it's funny how my mind is just kinda a natural at "remixing" ideas

like i'm really good at taking elements of one thing and adding it to another but coming up with something entirely new basically requires a divine spark lol

like i can write a concept for a bug fables sequel or some mix of a song or a game inspired by a bunch of different things but at the end of the day i can trace back every little inspiration to a source and usually it feels very evident

and this isn't really a complaint! there's definitely value in a remix, it's just a funny observation

[bonefall]

Hey, what makes a character a 'plot device but not a character'? And how do you not do that? I'm trying to do it on purpose but also I need to still make them interesting because it's on purpose, yknow?

A good skill to pick up is to learn to criticise criticism itself. A "plot device" is simply a thing that moves the plot along, it's a neutral literary analysis term! Usually, when people are angry that "a character has been used as a plot device," it doesn't mean they hate plot devices. It means they're gesturing at something deeper.

Runningwind and Bumble are equally plot devices in their deaths. They are both killed by the antagonist to escalate political tension. Runningwind is rarely "accused" of just being a plot device, and yet, we're talking about Bumble for the same thing.

So, why?

Well, Runningwind is just a background character, but in life, he was a part of the community. He was characterized as impatient but responsible. Yet, he wasn't SO important that he died with a bunch of unresolved plot threads.

He is mostly an extension of the entity of ThunderClan. His killing by Tigerstar, and the fear and paranoia that settles on the group after this, feel like a progression of the story insteas of something forced.

Bumble, on the other hand...

Is hated immediately by Gray Wing, when she's established as Turtle Tail's friend. Bumble's abuse at Tom the Wifebeater's hands invites even MORE investment. The rejection is shocking and upsetting. There's a story there about our main characters being imperfect; jealous, bigoted, and judgemental.

But, she is simply killed off. Everything they set up for this character is gone with little personalized fanfare. It's not a tragedy with a lesson about cruelty, or something anyone regrets.

It's just... plot. Gray Wing whinging that no one will like his shitty brother now that his body count is 2.

More than that, in the discussion of women in particular, "Fridging" was coined to give a name to the way women characters often don't get their stories told at all. There is a CULTURAL trend of female characters facing disproportionate violence, for the sake of advancing male plots.

Bumble has a lot going for her. Petal had a lot going for her. Turtle Tail had a lot going for her. Bright Stream had a lot going for her. When they died, they took their potential with them.

It's not always wrong to kill off a character of high potential, mind you. In Gurren Lagann, Kamina's death is sudden and shocking, leaving a massive hole in the hearts of the cast that never heals. Grappling with that loss, but also letting his memory fuel them, is a major theme of that story.

All that to say... there's no formula for avoiding it. You've gotta identify what the deeper issue is, in your specific narrative.

I can't say for certain what that will look like for your story, but here's some things I keep in mind;

When you make characters who exist to die, make sure they're people before you axe them.

Ask yourself; what about them does the cast miss?

If they just miss them because they were (pre-existing relationship), go back to the drawing board.

Fluttering Bird as an example. Who was she? Dead sister. Why do they miss her? Dead sister. No traits until after her death.

Runningwind was short-tempered and helpful. Kamina was a valuable leader who made people believe in a brighter future. Swiftpaw was fiesty and desperate to prove himself. The better characterized, the more profound the loss usually is.

If this is a female character who is dying just to serve the plot, be aware of cultural bias and tropes. How is the gender ratio looking in your cast? Is this happening disproportionately with your girls?

Note how Quiet Rain's litter had both a boy and a girl, but the girl was chosen to be "weaker" and wither away.

And how most of the time in DOTC, whenever a man had to be upset, a girl would get killed for it.

If you ever feel like the character on the chopping block is NOT a full character, ask yourself why it needs to be a character at all. You don't need to spend narrative time building out someone when a literal object of high value might suffice.

"My sister died when I swore to protect her and I can't face my family" = Old. Tired. Ive seen this.

"I lost my heirloom sword when I swore to protect it and I can't face my family." = Fascinating. Why was the sword so valuable? Will they really not take you back? How did you lose it?

When you do kill off "high value" characters, try to make sure you're not leaving too many plot threads hanging. Or at least make a point of how they will never get closure.

[stressfulsloth]

Thinking about Disco Elysium and stars. Something about communal experience and simultaneous isolation, hope and idealism, fear and beauty and terror and burning. The inherent horror in the vast romantic starscape of the sky, the melancholy and loneliness inherent in the untold distance, a communal experience of something too enormous to fathom. Stars bear witness to humanity, to the millions of tiny people crawling on the face of Elysium. They watch the people, and the people watch back, and make up stories about the stars. Stars symbolise love, hope, something unreachable and unattainable.

The way that the light of the stars reaches every single being in Elysium, from human to phasmid, but no matter how far it reaches it is still a cold and distant glow, always on the verge of going out. A moral brilliance, a holy light to strive towards, something always at risk of burning out, but there's a dichotomy too. A duality between the stars as brutal unfeeling observers, moralists even, like the aerostatics flying overhead, tiny dying lights that watch impassively over every terrible thing in the world, and the flipside; stars as the burning kernels of hope, furious burning flames that parallel Harry and his golden-orange forest fire nature. Stars as the light of communism, the star-and-antlers. They're hope and dreams- a million years in the stars. Rockstars and superstars. The light of a brighter future (however short-term that future might be) coming towards them at the end of the tunnel. It makes me think of Sacred and Terrible Air and the light pollution in Vassa- ending light pollution as the world ends. "You may laugh at this, but in the evening, when the big world in the distance swells into a bloody maelstrom, families come out into the street in Vaasa and are insignificant together. Only distant explosions disturb the deep peace of the winter night, its flawless starry sky. Everyone watches, heads tilted back." The stars are a shared experience. Something that everyone watches, insignificant together, when there's nothing more that can be done. Light in the face of darkness, community in the face of inevitability. Togetherness. The stars are there in the church with the ravers. They're there watching Harry and Kim together. Insignificant together. In dark times, should the stars also go out?

[daily-xisuma]

[152] Rewatched some jojo episodes today :-)

[jimbodyson]

i do love (hate) it when Twitter users willingly misinterpret the most basic things like even though Relvin said to Imogen 'i think about you a lot' 'i hope wherever you are, you're happy' and 'horses miss you as much as i do' just because he did not outright say 'i love you' that means he sucks balls and NOT that he doesn't have to say it for Imogen to know he does

there's obvious things he could've done better with Imogen but it's pretty obvious that over the course of the campaign Imogen has come to understand that he tried his best given that he's already someone that tends to keep his emotions to himself AND Lilian just left (probably making him keep even more if himself to himself)

in conclusion i wish people would look at things with Relvin from a less black and white perspective. he's obviously not the best dad but at the end of the day it's clear he really loves Imogen. he's just not good at saying that.

[marclef]

What inspired you to make Eyhm?

..... y'know since i don't have to spend several hours putting more effort than necessary into drawing a Cat for this i might as well answer it already lmao 😅

but, well, i KINDA have gone into it before, long story short she's an OC i've had for a long time that i really like putting into other media i like, just for the fun of it really! plus i'm just a really big cat person so, of course i'm going to make an OC based off of my favorite animal 🤗but Pizza Tower's kinda the first time i feel like i've really made her fit into the universe she's in, so much so that i've basically shoved the non-AU version of her off to the waywide, and now the Pizza version of her IS her, more or less! plus i'm just really proud of the design i made for her, i feel like there's a lot more personality than the simple design i had for her in the past.

there's been a lot of changes and other stuff i've made for her over time as well, of course, i'll share a couple silly things here just because i feel like it. (putting under a readmore because, eh, i don't feel like bothering people who couldn't care less heh 💧)

well, i do have what i think is the second(???) time i ever tried drawing Eyhm in Pizza Tower's art style, you can tell the original design i had for her was a lot different though 😅 (also behold one of my first times drawing Peppino, i still didn't know how the heck i wanted to draw this Italian Man yet)

(... and yeah, some old backstory stuff i had for her that's a lot different than it is now, mostly the fact that she KNOWS that she used to be human more than anything. but i won't get into all that here 👍)

speaking of backstory stuff, fun fact. i was inspired to change up the lore and backstory ideas i had for her a while back, partially because i didn't like it, and also in part because i had a weird-ass dream with her in it. i barely remember much about it, besides one very important detail: it had Pizzahead running Eyhm over in a car.

no, i don't know why this is important. but i did make an edit of it. here you go.

is this important to her backstory at all? no. but for some reason it inspired me to change her. thank you Pizzahead Hitting a Small Cat with a Car Dream.

..... okay maybe i got a little off track here. but that's the price you pay for asking me about my Funny Little Guys 👍👍 anyways, back to trying to draw other people's Little Guys for the rest of the month, so long 👋

[ebonytails]

sorry my post is just to complain but guys i literally hate adobe after effects. i can not explain to you the mental torture and how LOW it has brought my mental health because I *need* to use it for my post production class because it's "industry standard". ADOBE After Effects has made me write off the entire film and video production industry as a turn off and I never want to do it ever again.

The amount of times this has crashed on me where I lost everything? 5+ hours of work? 8+ hours of work? It's my fault for not saving sometimes but I also have auto-save on. it didn't save anything so im just left with nothing.

You want a trip to burn out town really quick? Use adobe after effects in an academic setting where you have no choice but to use this program.

I have never in my life TOUCHED a program SO TERRIBLE that it made me never want to do anything about that form of art/media EVER AGAIN

[lucienarcheron]

This fandom is getting weirder and weirder and that is not a compliment.

[commsroom]

i think there's something to be said about what exactly it means to be "non-human" in a story that is as much about humanity as wolf 359 is, where even the dear listeners are defined less by their own perspective and more by what they fail to understand and therefore reflect about the human perspective - to the point that they don't even have their own voices or faces or identities that aren't either given to them or taken from humans. they speak to humanity as a mirror.

even pryce and cutter are "very much humans" - pryce defined by her resentment of and desire to transcend its limitations, and cutter by his aspirations to redefine and create a "better" type of human - and find the idea that they might not be human laughable. it's interesting that they have distinctly transhumanist aspirations when their goal is the narrative opposite of common science fiction fears: that we will expand the definition of humanity so much that we'll lose whatever it is that makes us human. pryce and cutter's transhumanism narrows the definition of humanity to the worthy and the useful, as defined by them; "there will still be a humanity; it'll just be our humanity."

in direct opposition to that, i think it's meaningful that the show instead expands the definition of humanity in ways that include lovelace and hera, who in another show with different themes might be considered (in the descriptive, non-moralistic sense) non-human. i will always make a point of saying that personhood and humanity are two often-related but meaningfully distinct concepts, especially when talking about sci-fi and fantasy. i am talking about humanity.

the question of how hera identifies, and what social pressures influence that, is a complicated one. i've talked about it before and i will talk about again. what's important for the purposes of this post is that i think the show considers her fundamentally human. think about her role in shut up and listen - consider jacobi's lion example and the concept of different paradigms - that even things that are close to humans, comparatively speaking, understand the world in different ways. whatever differences hera may have from the others, it's primarily in experience, not fundamental understanding. she shares their emotions, their concerns, their values, their thought patterns. she has an appreciation for music, which the show considers a hallmark of humanity. she fits within the framework of humanity as the show defines and is, in her own words, left feeling "uneasy" about how difficult it might be to communicate with beings who don't. and it's significant that this takes place in shut up and listen, of all episodes, specifically because the way she is clearly and unambiguously included in the show's understanding of what it means to be human highlights the ways she and lovelace are othered by eiffel's careless comments that suggest otherwise.

(i don't want to get too into these details for this particular post, but it's worth noting that hera will refer to 'humans' as a category, often when she is upset and feeling isolated, but has never said that she 'isn't human' - she has never been upset that people are treating her 'too' human. i've seen it said about the line "you need to get it through your heads that what goes for you doesn't always go for me", but that's a frustration related to ability and safety, not identity. far more often, she will refer to herself in 'human' terms - referring idiomatically to experiences or body parts etc. that she doesn't literally have - and is upset primarily with comments referring to her status as an AI. it does not diminish how being an AI influences her perspective and experience, but again, so much of that is in terms of ability that it feels almost inseparable from a discussion about disability.)

lovelace's humanity and hera's humanity are so interlinked and directly paralleled in the text that i think it's impossible to really argue one of them is "not" human without making implications about the other. in desperate measures, lovelace tells kepler he's "not human" and he responds "you're hilarious. on a multitude of levels." later, defending lovelace against kepler's repeated dehumanization, hera very pointedly uses the phrase "that woman." in out of the loop, hera says she's never met anyone who "worked so hard at being inhuman" as jacobi, who says "what do you know about being human?" hera very emphatically responds, "i know plenty." later, defending hera against jacobi's repeated dehumanization, minkowski pointedly uses the phrase "that woman." with the care taken towards language and the way scenes and turns of phrase will parallel each other, that's not a coincidence. it might seem strange to have the "non-human" characters be the ones to express criticisms based on perceived "humanity" (something hera will do in other contexts as well - "we don't have funerals for animals" etc.) but in the broader context of the show, i think it's the point.

so, whether hera would ever call herself human, or be comfortable with that, is a complicated question for another time and depends on a lot of other factors. but wolf 359 is a show about humanity, it includes her within its definition of what it means to be human, and i wouldn't be comfortable definitively saying she's not human because of that. it can't be a neutral statement within the particular context of this show.

[shikai-the-storyteller]

I truly, from the bottom of my heart, hate angst without catharsis.

[softerhaze]

random outtakes that make me feel some type of way 💌

[supercantaloupe]

paper is Done. kinda shit but whatever

[thelostgirl21]

Ever since realising that Joey referring to Jaskier as sapiosexually connecting with Radovid was likely 100% intentional, I've literally been losing my shit over the potential implications...

Like... new headcanon!

What if Jaskier has always approached the act of having sex with someone else as a form of performance art, driven by his desire to please his "audience", and making other people passionately respond to what he's doing for them?

Like... what if what normally sexually interests him isn't so much inspired by the other person, but more by the general idea of being wanted, needed, and the anticipation of the positive feedback he might get from sexually interacting with them.

He readily experiences primary aesthetic attraction towards other people, finds them interesting, becomes curious about them, and feels instantly affectionate towards them; but he's not sexually aroused by / attracted to them, per say.

He really wants to make them feel good, and bask in that sense of intimacy, togetherness and praises he receives from being sexually involved with them (yeah, because he's that good at figuring out what pleases them, and offering it to them).

And somehow, audience response/participation tends to really inform how good or "smooth" he is when it comes to his ability to seduce someone, and convince them to become sexually intimate with him in the first place?

For example...

So... what if Jaskier is a bard and an artist through and through? Not just on stage, but in the sheets as well?

Turning sex into poetry and something very deliberate, where it's all about a sense of artistic expression, and a pure melody of various physical sensations and emotions!

Sexually? Jaskier is an artist, a creative, a free thinker... All is fair!

But it's not something that he usually feels any urge or need to engage in based on the way someone else inspires him any sudden desire to have sex with them specifically.

He loves his sexual partners, he's intrigued by them, he wants to connect with them - even if that connection lasts but a night - and sex allows him to do that.

But maybe he has no idea that sex might be experienced differently by others.

Maybe he just thinks they're like really really REALLY expressive and appreciative of the sex itself, or something, whenever he notices how hungrily some of them appear to throw themselves at him, or at each other.

Also, I've somehow always found it a bit weird how Jaskier seems to fully remain clear minded during Yennefer's magical orgy.

Yennefer comments on how Geralt seems to be immune to her spell, as if it's some kind of big deal!

But then, there's Jaskier...

He just waves at them as if he's totally unaffected by everyone else fucking each other around him, and being surrounded by a bunch of naked bodies having sex...

And/or looks like he's not quite comfortable with the way someone's hand is moving closer to his crotch at some point...

Grant it, he's slowly being suffocated to death by a Djinn's magic, and likely has other priorities than sex in mind!

But that's just the thing...

Isn't Yennefer's spell supposed to override people's ability to think rationally or fully understand what's happening? Everyone snaps out of it looking confused, and poor Jaskier just basically passes out, but he's never once looked like he stopped looking at what was happening around him from an outsider's P.O.V.

Whenever the camera cuts to him, he seems to be sharing the same reality as Geralt and Yennefer, not the kind of sexual haze everyone else appears to be happily trapped in.

Would being affected by the Djinn just make him immune to the whole "sex weed magic thingy" as well?

Or would the usual lack of primary sexual attraction towards other people make it a bit harder for Yennefer's spell to take a hold on him?

(Another headcanon theory I came up with - should Jaskier be revealed as being the direct descendant of Fjall and the Lark - would be that, perhaps, the small touch of magic in his blood would be enough to make him more resistant to certain types of spell... On top of being able to eat whatever he comes across without freaking poisoning himself, I swear!)

But yeah, let's just imagine, for a moment, that sapiosexual Jaskier would have no clue (or very little clue) of what it actually feels like to specifically be sexually attracted to someone (rather than the sex itself, and all it may represent to him) in a way where you are viscerally craving that sexual contact with that specific someone, and you feel like you might go crazy if they don't finally have sex with you.

Then, along comes Radovid, that he develops a sapioromantic and sapiosexual attraction for...

And, for a while, Jaskier thinks he's just losing his freaking mind, because there are moments where Radovid is just there, simply being all sensitive and insightful while discussing dwarven politics with Yarpen, for example...

... and poor Jaskier's never been so sexually aroused in his life!!!

But Radovid is not even technically doing anything that's supposed to be "sexually charged"!

He's fully clothed, being all smart and sensitive, talking about a topic of interest to him while having lunch by the side of the road...

...and Jaskier is just there, casually eating next to him while listening to him talk with their friends.

It's 100% casual and totally trivial, day to day stuff... No plan for Jaskier to try and seduce him and have sex there!

So, how come does he suddenly feel the urge to pounce on him and beg Radovid to just take him right here and there, in front of all their friends at camp, and it's taking all the self-control he can humanly muster not to act upon that impulse?!

Instead, Jaskier stands up, awkwardly excuses himself, and decides the best way to manage the situation is to go take a random dip fully clothed in the nearest river.

"Why?", they ask. Because he was getting hot, that's why!

And no, he couldn't just remove his clothes instead! He liked them really baggy an concealing that day, thank you very much!

As a matter of fact, he might decide to just start wearing his shirt over his pants from now on, because he's starting a new fashion trend! No other reason!

Oh...

Oh, no...

NO.

Don't you dare look at me all concerned while trying to read into my behavior, you stupid prince... Wait. Is that a smirk?

You're smirking aren't you?

How do you look like you've figured it out, when I've no fucking clue what's even going on with me?!

Great! And now the river's cool water is not even working anymore!

That's it! I'm never walking out of here again, and I hope you know it's all your fault!

No. No, don't take off your shirt and get into the water with me, that's not...

Oh? Oh! Everyone else is going and leaving us alone? Okay, nevermind! Fuck! Why's it so hard to walk while standing waist deep in water? Surely there must be a way to get to you faster...

And I'm just imagining poor Jaskier trying to ask Yennefer if Radovid might be some kind of sorcerer with latent magical abilities or something... Because, whenever he's around, there are moments where he randomly feels this overwhelming urge to make love to him, even if the context is not appropriate for delivering a sexual performance of any kind!

Like yes, it has happened to him before to have "the muses" whisper in his ear that sex with a certain someone might be good, and he's typically very open to sudden bursts of inspiration and unplanned sexual improvisation!

But that's not the same thing!

It only happens specifically with Radovid - especially when he's saying or doing something really witty, sensitive or insightful - and it's like his whole body suddenly catches fire, gets all tense and trembling with need; and being touched by him and having sex with him feels like finally being able to breathe after someone's forcefully been holding your head under water for a while...

Radovid must be bewitching him, somehow, for sure!

And Yenn is like "You know that what you've just been describing is simply what regular sexual desire feels like for most people, right?"

And Jaskier's just going:

[stories-by-rie]

how to feel excited about my own projects again

[skaldish]

A common attitude that I find absolutely insufferable is whenever people insist, "It's just the way things are."

"You just feel old when you're in your 30's."

"Some people are just assholes like that."

"Kids are just difficult at that age."

Like...buddy. Given all the horrors we've seen the past few years I think it's time we call a spade a spade. The only purpose these answers serve is to justify your feelings. They don't actually explain anything.

Why do we feel old in our 30's? Have we meaningfully differentiated "aging" from things like "fatigue from adult responsibilities catching up to us" or "sleep debt" or "fatigue from chronic pain"?

Why are some people assholes? Is it because they enjoy pushing others around, or is it a byproduct of something like insecurity, anger due to feeling powerless, mental health issues, stress, rebellion, trauma, fear, conditioning on how they ought to behave, etc? Have we asked people why they act like assholes sometimes?

Why are kids difficult at that age? Is it nature or nurture? Are they trying to communicate something they can't put into words? Are they bored and need enrichment? Is their behavior a symptom of a health problem? Have you asked them what's up? Do you have a history of respecting their answers, enough for them to confide you with the truth?

Sure, you don't always have to be interested in investigating the reason behind something, but that's a choice that says you're content with not knowing, rather than the reason truly being "it's just the way things are, are who are we to question it?"

Questioning things is why we have smartphones, ibuprophen, and elections, Greg. If we were fine with the way things were we wouldn't have bothered leaving the trees.