#i wish i can have a fandom

[piripiip]

Basically piploopsy’s sp au

(Im a #2 heavenparkfan)

@piploopsy

[luguangs]

though the movie might be cancelled, yuri on ice will live forever in our hearts. thank you yoi fandom, it's been real ♡

[biblically-accurate-dca]

substitute

[sinisternoodles101]

HERES CLIPSE she’s my favoritest atm. sadly there is so little content i can find

[frankensteinposm0]

are there still beautiful things?

[kaiserouo]

(prev | next | first)

don't know what these white balls do but they sure look cool

[scribbyizhere]

does anybody feel Zesty abt ldr Sun?? oh hey yeah not me pffft nah. spirals

love death and rollerskates by @spadillelicious

[sun-e-chips]

Friendly reminder that your art makes someone happy, even if it’s just for yourself.

It is ok to make “messy” art, what matters is you got to have fun creating something and that in itself is wonderful!

[invinciblerodent]

See, the Treviso vs Minrathous choice would be cool! It's a good choice on paper, but it's executed... not so great (the game's framing as "if you don't save this city it will have Political Consequences vs if you don't save that city All The Civilians Who Can't Flee Will Die because the whole water supply will get blighted" when you have to make your choice is kind of ass, as a baseline) and then it gets further undermined when the final battle is in Minrathous so the city gets fucked up and the venatori mostly take it over in the chaos anyway because Rook gets stuck in Fade jail for several weeks. It turns the decision into "do I want to blight one city or both?" on a second playthrough which does, indeed, have a 'morally right' answer.

And that's the problem with this 'complex and interesting moral question'. This is why people are unhappy with it. Because it completely fails to stick the landing.

See, this is nothing against you, but I knew I was going to get messages like this, even before I would have hit "post".

I'm not saying that either decision is "right". That's the point of it all, that there is no "right" answer, and arguments can be (and are, within the game) raised in favor of both. That's what it's supposed to be about, that from Rook's point of view (as a character, not your point of view, as the player), there are good, significant reasons to save both, but they can only aid one, because they are only one person. It's meant to make your character feel small, and to highlight the enormity of the foe that they are facing. Its purpose is to make Elgar'nan and Ghilan'nain feel like they have all the tools to win the war, even when they lose a battle.

Now, ngl, I'm just going to straight up ignore the "oh Minrathous gets blighted in the endgame anyway so there's no point" line of reasoning altogether, because Rook has no way of knowing that. That's metagaming, and if that's the way you want to play your game, you're obviously welcome to do so, it's no skin off my back, do whatever you want forever... but characters in linear stories should, theoretically, only be capable of acting within the confines of their narrative. If we want to actually talk about the ramifications of certain decisions, it doesn't make sense to me to act as if a character should have the ability to make a decision based on information that they have no way of having. I don't think that's productive to the conversation.

(plus, I would argue that adding that as a potential regret, the knowledge that them dooming Treviso ultimately didn't accomplish nearly as much as they thought it would, is far more compelling from a character- and a storytelling point of view, than going into it all with the intention of making All The Right Choices, with Rook secure in the knowledge that at least they are going to be proven "right" by posterity. That does far less for me, personally. I think your Rook is allowed, even encouraged, to have complex, contradictory feelings about the decisions they make.)

Second of all, for three games now, we have been told that Tevinter and the constant, decades-long war they have been engaged in with the Qunari is the only thing that stands in the way of the Qunari expansion towards Orlais, Nevarra, the Marches- there is a reason the occupation starts in Rivain and Antiva, the coastal regions of the mainland furthest from the Imperium.

For two games, we have known that the Venatori (due to many of them being old money, old blood, powerful magisters) have infiltrated the highest ranks within the Magisterium, that they are cunning and dangerous and lying in wait, and that they pull the strings from many directions, with not much besides a handful of Magisters (Dorian and Maevaris included), the Shadow Dragons, and the Archon (who, if the Inquisitor kept Radonis in power, is not only an ally to the Inquisition, but also vocally opposed Corypheus, and, by proxy, the Venatori) to stand in their way.

Yes, there are always many civilian lives at stake. Yes, Treviso is devastated in the attack and its aftermath (physically to a much more extensive degree than Minrathous), and yes, the immediate threat of the dragon causes more obvious destruction there- blighting the canals, causing a staggering loss of life, all of these effects will stretch far into the future.

But in Minrathous, the dragon is not the focal point. It's a distraction.

In Minrathous, the dragon is there to create chaos, to rampage and destroy all it can in order to sow discord and divert protection away from the Archon's palace (notably the place with the cannons that it very well can't turn onto itself), so that the Venatori can break through the Archon's guard, and successfully pull off a bloody coup that then puts them unequivocally in control of the capital city of one of the most powerful and influential countries of Thedas: military, magic, power all together.

And while saving Minrathous at that moment doesn't result in the city being perfectly peaceful, all fine, great and dandy, the Archon still dies as a result of the attack, it does at least ensure that their defenses are not stretched too thin, fighting on two different fronts at the same time. As a consequence of that, it ensures that the Black Divine, one of the pivotal people standing in the way of the Venatori expansion, doesn't contract the Blight. It stops members of the abolitionist group that's known- and respected for standing up for the needs of the disenfranchised and oppressed from being openly decimated, and strung up in the streets like Christmas lights.

It stops the Venatori, who then have next to no one to oppose them, from doing damn near irreparable damage, and tossing all the political progress of the last decade into the nearest shitter to catapult Tevinter back to times when nobody bat an eye to the rich and powerful using people as furniture.

(And, though this is pure speculation, this can be disregarded, however fractured the Antaam is, however many of their forces they have diverted towards Rivain and Antiva, I don't think it's such a stretch of the imagination to say that it'll likely only take them time to realize that with their allies now in control of Minrathous, they have an open avenue through Tevinter to enter Orlais, seize Val Royeaux, seize the Marches city by city, and force the Blight-ravaged south to fight on two fronts at the same time.)

I don't think any of these are things that I'm pulling out of my ass, or something that Rook isn't made aware of. Neve doesn't hammer it home quite so clearly, she also doesn't have the gift of foresight, but in the blind panic that she is communicating in that moment, she does say that her primary concern is the Venatori coup, and the player has been introduced to the Shadow Dragons and told of their significance before that, even without the context that Inquisition, Trespasser, and the comics provide. We've met the Viper, we've met Maevaris, we've met Dorian- we've talked to all of them, and we know what they're up against.

It's not an easy decision, and it's not meant to be one, or one you're meant to think about as "well you're either siding with X and are right, or with Y and you're wrong". This is not the mage uprising, where the choice falls flat because one side's point of view is "no genocide good", and the other's is "church-sanctioned genocide good".

I think that this choice is a relatively early game decision that is meant to make you think about whether your Rook, right then and there within their arc in the story, is the kind of person who would do anything to save even one civilian life even if politically it's devastating, the kind of person to think about the big picture and consider all the political ramifications even if it means a sacrifice of lives- or, alternatively, the kind of person who would do anything for a place that they call home, even if it means dooming another and letting down their friend.

You say that it fails to stick the landing. But that's very easy to say if you are the one yanking the mat from under its feet.

[fromtheseventhhell]

I love how people are only ever interested in defending Arya's right to be weird-looking. It's never defending her intelligence from people who claim she's incapable of thinking for herself, highlighting her importance to the plot and refusing to see her as just a prop, acknowledging how much of her story gets stolen and given to other characters, talking about her trauma or how often it gets erased and overlooked, seeing her as more than just an attack dog/bodyguard, etc. Nope. It's just a "why can't people let Arya be ugly/unconventional looking? :(" post every other week because people are, for whatever reason, obsessed with how Arya is visually perceived. One of the most misinterpreted characters yet the issue is only ever with her being portrayed as "too pretty" or the wrong "type" of pretty. This fandom will entirely rewrite a character's motivations, values, and role in the story to the point that they consider references to canon "hate" but! The true injustice to canon is we acknowledge that she is described as pretty several times. Arya simply existing as her pretty, important, and non-conforming self is too complex and confusing for people to comprehend 😔.

[gingermintpepper]

Okay, let's finally talk about EPIC's Apollo

I feel very compelled to say, first of all, that I do not dislike Epic. In fact, I am very fond of Epic and have been following its production and status very eagerly! I attend all the launch streams, I watch all of Herrans' update videos; I am, at the end of the day, a fan and I want it to be known that my words are spoken out of love and passion as much as they are spoken from a place of critique.

So really, what my problem with Epic's Apollo?

In the briefest possible terms; the choice to have Apollo be defined by his musical aspect in God Games is thematically strange. And not in the 'oh well in the Odyssey, Apollo was important to Odysseus and his family so it's weird that that wasn't kept in Epic' strange, strange in the sense that Odysseus' character arc since My Goodbye has been getting more and more obviously Apollonian and so it is positively bizarre that when we get to meet Apollo, the god seems entirely disinterested in him and his affairs. So much so that he is not even defined by any station that would indicate that he has been watching over and protecting Odysseus and his family.

What do I mean by 'Odysseus has been following an Apollonian arc'? I'm so glad you asked!

Remember Them is the last song in which Odysseus explicitly uses his sword until Mutiny where he must use it to defend himself against Eurylochus' blade. He uses it to help enact the plan to conquer Polyphemus and, due to Polites dying in that battle, Polites who wished for Odysseus to put the blade down entirely and embrace a post-war life, Odysseus also retires his sword. This is an action that symbolically separates him from Athena - and the image of Odysseus as a traditional warrior set for him in Horse and Infant - as much as My Goodbye physically separates him from the goddess and her war-ways - from this point onwards, Odysseus will no longer be leaning on Athena's wisdom or methods to solve his problems. Likewise, he will no longer be able to rely on her protection.

Odysseus thusly solves most of his upcoming problems through diplomacy and avoidance. He approaches Aeolus - a strange and ambiguous god (both in gender and in motivation) and appeals to them for help. Circe too, he approaches not with wishes to conquer or for revenge, but for the safe returning of his men and an alternate way forward. In all of these scenarios, there is some Apollonian element which is subtly interweaved alongside the influence of other gods; it is with a bow and arrows that Polyphemus' sheep is slain (and thus it is this Apollonian element which is at the root of Odysseus' spat with Poseidon), it is a vision of Penelope that warns Odysseus that his men are about to open Aeolus' wind-bag, Circe's peace offering to Odysseus is to refer him to a prophet of Apollo who has since died.

In this way, Apollo is walking alongside Odysseus for all of his journey after Athena departs - even in the Underworld, he is guiding him. It is Tiresias' proclamation that is the last straw for Odysseus, it is by the power of a mouthpiece of Apollo that Odysseus decides to embrace his ruthlessness. It is with the bow and arrow that Odysseus subdues the siren who sought to trick him, likewise, Odysseus does not attempt to undermine or escape the fate of paying Scylla's passage price - he knows of the doom about to befall the six men and quite unlike the rest of the journey until this point, he does not fight against it. This all comes to a head on Thrinacia where it is a blade which sacrifices the sun god's cow and brings destruction upon the crew once more.

My point with all of this is that when I heard the teasers for God Games years ago, it made perfect sense to me that Apollo would be Round One - he is not Odysseus' adversary and has no reason to oppose Athena's wish to free him. From other teasers about what will happen in the climax of Epic, Apollo will still be walking alongside Odysseus - it is Apollo's bow that Penelope will give the suitors to string. Likewise, it is Apollo's bow that will prove Odysseus' legitimacy and identity. That bow will be the power by which Odysseus hunts his adversaries and cleans out his palace - it is Apollo who is the avatar of Odysseus' ruthlessness, not Athena.

So tell me, truly, what was the point of having Apollo raise a non-argument in God Games? Why have him appear unconcerned, aloof and slightly oblivious? Why have him appear in his capacity as the Lord of Music at all?? And if the intention was never to make Apollo an active player in Odysseus' life like he was in the Odyssey, why keep Odysseus as a primary archer?

The answer of course is that Apollo is inextricable from the fabric of the Odyssey - his influence and favour exudes from Odysseus just as much as Athena's. In Athena's ten year sulk, it would have been Apollo who kept Telemachus and Penelope safe. It would have been Apollo protecting Odysseus from Poseidon's gaze as he travelled the seas (according to the Odyssey anyway)

Forgive me for not being excited about something that I thought was being purposefully set up. I was extremely ecstatic about all of the little Apollonian details that litter the sagas because I know where this story ends up (loosely) but all God Games did was reveal that maybe those Apollonian details were not intentional at all, but merely the ghost of the Apollo who persistently haunts those he favours, even if he cannot explicitly come to their aide in an adaptation.

[broareweabouttoviberightnow]

the idea of darry meeting mason is actually so tragic to me. Mason "does it ever get easier? do you ever stop feeling like it's not enough? do you ever stop aching for the life you should have had?" Mccormick and Darry "No. But sometimes they'll run to you when they skin their knee or look at you first when they laugh or fall asleep pressed against your chest and maybe that's enough" Curtis

Is it ever enough to just love them?

No. I wish it was.

[deadpoetsandlivinglegends]

Feel like Neil couldn’t have been any other kind of actor than one in theatre. If he was a movie actor or on social media or whatnot, it would not be the same. Theatre by nature is fleeting. Recorded mediums can be rewatched over and over, creating a time loop of sorts. We the audience can keep going back to a time when Neil is still alive. Theatre however is live and once the play is over, there is no going back except in our memories. It is much like life. We are forced to live in the moment in a theater lest we miss it altogether. It’s not that the poets choose to live in a world where Neil is dead, it’s that they must because the only other option is to die themselves. I feel like Keatings teachings could only be reflected in stage theatre because that’s the only way there can be no time loop of grief. I think dead poets society itself isn’t about overcoming the authority in your life to do what you want but rather about grief, about allowing oneself to feel grief and all one’s emotions without letting it consume you and to keep living after, to live every day in the moment lest you fall into grief and regret that will destroy you or force you into a miserable life

[spirited-splashes]

Click drawing for higher quality

Sequel to this

Inspired by @artsymeeshee (hope the tag won’t bother you!) recent comic where ford hugs Stan except i drew it in reverse, I love the Stangst twins—

Sketch and reference below:

[mrmeepsmadmind]

starbee comic,,, if u get the reference then u understand a pivotal part of how i see their dynamic

Bee x scream is like if that one rlly bubbly & makes herself seem ditzy and cute girl to everyone to have friends who'll dump her the moment they get a bf & she's probably on the spectrum but no one notices or cares to delve deeper into her bcs she's so 'cute' & smiles & masks to be liked ( bcs she doesnt want anyone to delve deeper into her personality & realize shes actually Not perfect miss lil daddys girl purity ring ) was forced to be stuck with The Bitchtm intimidating weird girl who's also undiagnosed but everyone knows there's Something with her & treated her differently in a way they Think is discreet but She Knows & no matter how hard she tries, everyone's gonna have this Undertone with her so she's just given up on trying to seem pleasant to everyone but still desperately wants to be loved & has a slight clue as to why ppl keep hating her even when she tries for them not to for once but still can't get an answer bcs her life sucks and diagnosis is expensive and she has no time and she's - omg why is this bitch (bee) making her notes all cute with big colorful fonts & organized by alphabetical shade marker collection haha she's so weird (<- is Also weird bcs hes starscream). im gonna ask to borrow one of her favorite markers (the baby blue one) and dry it out while she stares at me with big wet eyes trying to find a polite way to put 'im gonna kill you' in a sentence

[clownsuu]

Small detour of what I usually post, but I absolutely wish (other) clown the best of luck during these confusing and almost hopeless times- nobody knows how to deal with such amount of attention in such short amount of time- a blessing and a curse to behold