#like do your own research

[oldcardigan]

just the reaction from people over taylor telling her supporters to vote in the primaries for who best represents them tells me everything i need to know about why she has not, and will likely never make a statement on palestine. people would just call her disingenuous, or pick apart her statement to find something they disagree with.

i do still want her to speak up about palestine and urge for a ceasefire, and i would love to see her speak about other issues too (abortion bills, anti-lgbtq, etc) but at the same time, i completely understand why she doesn’t.

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

hope you feel better soon!

I am riddled with ailments, but I stay silly!

[reality-detective]

Times Like These 🤔

[serpentface]

how do you come up with the ways cultures in your setting stylize people/animals/the world in general in their artwork, i.e. jewlery, rock carvings, statues, etc? Each culture in your world seems to have a very unique "art style" and I love it a lot - makes them seem that much more 'real'. This is something I struggle with a lot in my own worldbuilding and I'd love to pick your brain if possible 😁

I think a starting point is to have a research process based in the material realities of the culture you're designing for. Ask yourself questions like:

Where do they live? What's the climate/ecosystem(s) they are based in? What geographic features are present/absent?

What is their main subsistence method? (hunter gatherer, seasonal pastoralist, nomadic pastoralist, settled agriculturalist, a mix, etc)

What access to broader trade networks do they have and to whom? Are there foreign materials that will be easily accessible in trade and common in use, or valuable trade materials used sparingly in limited capacities?

Etc

And then do some research based on the answers, in order to get a sense of what materials they would have routine access to (ie dyes, metal, textiles, etc) and other possible variables that would shape how the art is made and what it's used for. This is just a foundational step and won't likely play much into designing a Style.

If you narrow these questions down very specifically, (ie in the context of the Korya post- grassland based mounted nomads, pastoralist and hunter-gatherer subsistence, access to wider trade networks and metals), you can direct your research to specific real world instances that fit this general idea. This is not to lift culturally specific concepts from the real world and slap them into your own setting, but to notice commonalities this lifestyle enforces - (ie in the previous example- mounted nomadic peoples are highly mobile and need to easily carry their wealth (often on clothing and tack) therefore small, elaborate decorative artwork that can easily be carried from place to place is a very likely feature)

For the details of the art itself, I come up with loose 'style guides' (usually just in my head) and go from there.

Here's some example questions for forming a style (some are more baseline than others)

Are geometric patterns favored? Organic patterns? Representative patterns (flowers, animals, stars, etc)? Abstract patterns?

Is there favored material(s)? Beads, bone, clay, metals, stones, etc.

When depicting people/animals, is realism favored? Heavy stylization? The emotional impression of an animal? Are key features accentuated?

How perspective typically executed? Does art attempt to capture 3d depth? Does it favor showing the whole body in 2 dimensions (ie much of Ancient Egyptian art, with the body shown in a mix of profile and forward facing perspective so all key attributes are shown)? Will limbs overlap? Are bodies shown static? In motion?

Does artwork of people attempt to beautify them? Does it favor the culture's conception of the ideal body?

Are there common visual motifs? Important symbols? Key subject matters?

What is the art used for? Are its functions aesthetic, tutelary, spiritual, magical? (Will often exist in combination, or have different examples for each purpose)

Who is represented? Is there interest in everyday people? Does art focus on glorifying warriors, heroes, kings?

Are there conventions for representing important figures? (IE gods/kings/etc being depicted larger than culturally lesser subjects)

Is there visual shorthand to depict objects/concepts that are difficult to execute with clarity (the sun, moon, water), or are invisible (wind, the soul), or have no physical component (speech)?

Etc

Deciding on answers to any of these questions will at least give you a unique baseline, and you can fill in the rest of the gaps and specify a style further until it is distinct. Many of these questions are not mutually exclusive, both in the sense of elements being combined (patterns with both geometric and organic elements) or a culture having multiple visual styles (3d art objects having unique features, religious artwork having its own conventions, etc).

Also when you're getting in depth, you should have cultural syncretism in mind. Cultures that routinely interact (whether this interaction is exchange or exploitation) inevitably exchange ideas, which can be especially visible in art. Doing research on how this synthesizing of ideas works in practice is very helpful- what is adopted or left out from an external influence, what is retained from an internal influence, what is unique to this synthesis, AND WHY. (I find Greco-Buddhist art really interesting, that's one of many such examples)

Looking at real world examples that fit your parameters can be helpful (ie if I've decided on geometric patterns in my 'style guide', I'll look at actual geometric patterns). And I strongly encourage trying to actually LEARN about what you're seeing. All art exists in a context, and having an understanding of how the context shapes art, how art does and doesn't relate to broader aspects of a society, etc, can help you when synthesizing your own.

[adriancatrin]

soulmark au sketches. the idea of sokka in proven ‘soulmates are real’ universes consistently intrigues me—how would that impact his skepticism/interpretation of fate/destiny/free will? personally i think he’d be very angry for a very long time and probably not even understand why

[ireton]

[bowandbrush]

it’s honestly scary being a fan of usagi miyamoto/yuichi whilst being in the rise fandom and not shipping leosagi,,,because it feels like everyone and their grandma likes it. like I’m sorry!! Don’t kill me please

[summerongrand]

ao3 is down again and people are coming to tumblr to check if, indeed, ao3 is down for everyone else (it is)

[morangoowada]

Part 2 of Brazilronpa

Previous part here

[bunnieswithknives]

Considering it's a popular headcanon... does Peri have any disabilities of his own in the Nature AU? Might help him better help out Dev with his problems.

I headcanon that he has weak joints, probably something like Joint Hypermobility Syndrome or Hypermobile EDS? Something that causes the connective tissue of his joints to just, not be that good.

His joints hurt often and physical exertion is a lot more taxing on him than it is for most other people or fairies.

[palatinewolfsblog]

“The profession of journalism ought to be

about telling people what they need to know -

not what they want to know.”

Walter Cronkite.

The Art of Gravitas

(for my old Friend @acommonloon ) ...

[anxietycheesecake]

There's something so "performative" about the finale, not sure how to articulate it. I mean, it's been like that for a while, but there were still sincere moments every now and then (probably from the cast putting all their actussy into it). It wanted to make a statement so bad, regardless of whether you think they were mocking us or not. "I'm not a normal sitcom, I'm a cool sitcom, like Seinfield. I don't fit in and I don't want to fit in. Have you ever seen my characters evolve? Oh... Oh... No, you haven't! I artificially took that back every single time! That's cool."

They wanted to remove the sense of a plot and a purpose that season 3 and partially season 4 gave it so hard it's like they couldn't think of anything else. It's funny because it's pointless and unsatisfying, even though we have managed to balance raunchy comedy and emotional scenes just fine before. It's easier this way and it get us Reddit praise. But here's the thing, it wasn't even that funny. Season 1 was just sitcom shenanigans and dark comedy and it was hilarious. Like, when was the last time you physically bent over in laughter while watching this show and are you sure it wasn't because the actors were making a funny voice or a funny face that absolutely wasn't scripted?

But I mean, all that aside, I think it's just cringe. It's giving "how you doing, fellow kids?" It's overdone and so eager to be disruptive it ends up being anticlimatic. "That's the point! We were trying to be anticlimatic!" Ok, bro, you're either a shit writer because you couldn't come up with an actual conclusion or because you genuinely thought that'd make good tv.

Comparing wwdits to Seinfield is like when wannabe great American novelist says he's writing the next Great Gatsby. No you're not. And I don't mean this as "wwdits isn't worth shit compared to actual high art sitcoms such as Seinfield" (I actually liked it better when it wasn't trying to become Seinfield); it's just... There's already a Seinfield. And there was already a wwdits that had found its footing and its voice and was doing a near perfect balancing act between comedy and drama, while keeping it humor-focused at all times. Your story is yours but when my book was starting to sound a lot like The Girls by Emma Cline minus the ABSOLUTE LITERATURE of it (arguably the best thing about The Girls), my mom was like "this not you, girl, what are you doing?" And that was MY MOM, not some random people on the Internet who are a small portion of the people who put food on my table (hopefully, heh -pay writers better, bitches >:(-). Like, dude, you're in your 40s, how can you be this petty?

At the end of the day, it was just petty. It read like fanfiction a troll would write. And they can try to gaslight us into buying it was actually such a smart move and amazing writing, but we know the truth. "We've thought about six possible endings for Guillermo's arc and haven't decided on one", "We kind of just come up with things that might be funny and work them into an episode"; things being said about a show one its fourth and fifth season. Absolutely valid, of course, but you can just admit you bit more than you could chew and wanted an easy way out. We get it, it's your job, do whatever you need to get that (far too small) paycheck, but don't put a "subversive" label on it and call it a perfect ending.

And if you're so willing to disrespect your fanbase or convince them they were watching a completely different show mere three years ago, for fuck's sake, commit to the bit and at least make it entertaining. Characters just spelling out things that are going to annoy the fans or prove to them it was silly to care about the shit and fart show for half and hour? THREE TIMES? Dude, you can be more subtle, media litecary's been dead for a while now. It's not unfunny in the sense that it's offensive; rather it was offensive how deeply unfunny it was. How can you manage to be this dishonest while doing everything in your power to make yourself seem even more dishonest??? smh

[reality-detective]

[genericpuff]

Intresting how its only trivializing and mocking green myths when non-greek white people do it, but not when non-greek poc do it. Its almost if you dont actually care

lmao bro what

i literally have zero clue what you're arguing here, "stop criticizing rachel for writing her greek myth retelling from a predominantly whitewashed westernized and christian-washed point view" ?? yeah okay lol

[sarafangirlart]

I fucking hate this hc that Athena actually “gifted” Medusa by turning her into a monster bc it literally makes no sense and whoever made that up doesn’t know shit about Greek mythology bc if Athena really wanted to protect her then why did she help Perseus kill her??? Look man I love Athena but this is such a stupid way to rationalize her treatment of Medusa. If you don’t like how evil she is when written by Ovid then why not just go with actual Ancient Greek sources that actually say that Medusa was born a monster and be done with it?

Let Medusa just be an evil scary monster again pls and stop demonizing Perseus he’s literally the least problematic man in Greek mythology. Not only has he never cheated on his wife but he’s a certified mama’s boy.

[ireton]

Eva Vlaardingerbroek - Agenda 2030