#listen i'm not an artist by any means but i'm still happy with this illustration

[vykio]

i’ve been feeling smaller for @aftgtandn 2.4k words — Rated T

What if Aaron picked up Neil fro the airport that first day?

Summary:

Aaron narrowed his eyes suspiciously at Neil, preemptively admonishing when he’d told him, “Don’t do anything stupid in Arizona.”

“I won’t do anything stupid in Arizona,” Neil had promised. Aaron had given him a sidelong glance full of mistrust, but he hadn’t said anything else. Aaron’s intuition hadn’t been wrong—Neil went on to vanish for those fourteen days, leaving all of Aaron’s questions about Arizona, his family, where the hell he was, why why why unanswered.

Neil nearly sighed and just barely resisted. Aaron hadn’t said anything then, and Neil knew he’d have to touch base with him at some point too. They didn’t have many chances to talk between Aaron’s arrival and their picking up Andrew—he’d just hoped he wouldn’t have to contend with both twins in one night.

-----------

Huuuuge huge shout out to the mods for hosting this event!!!!

[acilykos]

Hi. I see you're aroace and I'm too so I was wondering if I could ask you a question? Idk if this is something you do I found you through aroace senkuu post so absolutely feel free to ignore if you don't want to talk about it.

So basically I'm trying to figure out what exactly loveless means. BC a lot of people both arospec and not have told me that label might fit (as in I want 0 romance etc. But also no platonic equivalent). However. I am a very passionate person about my chosen career, music, art, my cat. Those are all things I feel so strongly about, I wouldn't know what to call it but "love". Similarly there are people I care about, just not in a way where I want romance with them or a platonic version of that kind of relationship.

(I've seen you call senkuu loveless too, and I'm a little confused BC he clearly does care deeply about some people and possibly even more so science. Why not call that love? Is it a terminology thing?)

I'm not trying to pick a fight, I really like your analysis of senkuu.

I'm genuinely trying to understand.

It's possible to reject the societal notion of what love is. I do so myself.

But there's no denying that the chemicals involved are something everyone experiences. Like. Everyone gets dopamine, vasopressin, oxytocin etc. It's just the context that's different. Much like oxytocin is experienced both in mother-infant bonding and in sexual contact, I get a dopamine rush listening to music but not making out with someone.

(granted romantic love hasn't been that well examined but there does seem to be a consensus on the general chemistry involved)

Same chemicals but different result/feeling, you know?

Not getting these chemicals at all is impossible I think, so that can't be what loveless means.

So what does it mean??? Is it just about society's perception of love??

I personally approached my lack of romantic attraction by Googling the brain chemistry BC clearly I wasn't getting anywhere with the emotional side. I'm not an expert. But the definitions of different aro orientations I see commonly, don't actually address this at all. It's like everyone decided on a different definition of "love" and nobody told me any of them.

Again, I know this sounds very passionate, but I always sound like that. I'm not trying to pick a fight, nor am I expecting you to solve my identity crisis. So really no need to reply if you don't want to. I can see how this would be. A lot to try and answer.

Hi, hi!!

First of all, I'm happy to meet a fellow AroAce!! I'm also calling myself loveless because it fits the most, I did research before and found it was the closest to describe myself.

Second of all, I think it depends on the definition of what loveless means for oneself because as always, sexuality at the end of the day is a fluid and personal thing.

Apologies if some of the thoughts seem jumbled or contradicting. I just woke up, was very happy about getting to ramble and I just don't know how to properly describe my "emotional thought processes" because I decided to illustrate my points with examples.

It's a long read too, I hope you don't mind.

Personally, I define it as a "lack of attraction" because oriented and angled AroAces experience other types of attraction (like platonic, aesthetic, etc.), but don't ask me to explain the difference between either, I really have no idea what it is (no offense to any angled or oriented AroAces). Personally, I find it ironic that the two most known "orientations" of AroAce people are still based on experiencing attraction despite AroAces being known for not experiencing it. So we had to create another word to say "Yeah, we actually don't experience any type of attraction”. It's also ironic to me that we call it "loveless" because it's not that we don't love, we just aren't attracted to people.

I'm an artist, I love art and drawing myself, as well as writing.

I'm also a scientist, I love chemistry, astronomy, pharmacology, psychology, really, I'm just always happy to talk about any subject. In fact, that's my current career, I'm a pharmaceutical technician.

I have favourite songs, favourite subjects, favourite seasons. Favourite shows, favourite characters, hell, I also have favourite ships.

I care about my family and friends too.

It's just that I'm not attracted to people. I don't want a romantic relationship because I don't experience romantic attraction. Same as I don't want a sexual one. I just don't see the need or appeal for another person if the goal is to just have a dinner date or a climax. Sure romance and sex can come hand in hand, but that depends on whether or not you experience either or if you're committed in a relationship. Anyways, I digress.

These two are the typical ones people talk about when it comes to attraction, but then there are the illusive platonic and aesthetic attractions, and many more I believe. One of them is explained later which causes AroAces in the first place to also use the labels oriented and angled.

Platonic attraction, or at least as I come to understand it, is seeing a person and just wanting to be their friend. You see someone and you think "wow, I really want to be their friend!!" also apparently called having a "squish".

I don't do that. I don't really feel something compelling me to talk to this person to become their friend.

Same as I don't feel attraction towards aesthetically pleasing people (which is also a highly individual definition). Or well, for a lack of a better term, the only "Wow, I really like how they look" I experience is in terms of gender envy. I don't want to be with them, I don't want to be them either. I just think "I'd like to express my gender like that". If that makes any sense.

I see people talk about "they're hot" and "they're so cute looking" and how they have this attraction towards them because of the way they look, but I just don't? I may appreciate the beauty by acknowledging that someone has nice features or a cool style, but it's the same as me looking at the weather and going "Ah, the sun is shining, isn't that nice." before continuing to do whatever I did, not spending more time on thinking about the weather.

For a real life example: My sister and I are going to a driving school. She has an aesthetic (and I call it on purpose an aesthetic attraction. She has not spoken once with the guy and she also said it's not exactly a crush) on one of the other people there, which to me makes no sense given his general character he revealed at least at the driving school. She even took his pen he forgot at school (just some company gifted pen from when we got a visit that day) in hopes of giving it back to him and struck up a conversation (She failed to. She was too embarrassed, in case you're curious).

I only acknowledge he has a nice jawline. That's it.

I don't feel any type of attraction towards people. I don't want or need to be their romantic partner. I don't want or need a sexual relationship. Just because someone has a personality that clicks with mine, I don't automatically feel the need to become their friend. If we become friends, great. If we don't it is what it is.

Obviously when I'm friends with someone, I care about them, but it's just... not the way friendships are usually portrayed. I don't feel the need to have many friends, or meet up with them constantly or go on trips or anything of the like. I like them a lot, I want them to be well. I just... don't really feel an attraction? I don't know how to properly explain it.

An attraction for me is either the need to be constantly with them, one way or another, because you physically and/or mentally/psychologically feel the need to be in their presence, whenever an opportunity arises OR that you spent a lot of time just thinking about them (daydreaming, fantasies, you get it). I just don't feel like that. I'm fine with not talking or seeing friends for multiple months or years. I'm also fine if we don't talk constantly too. If the friendship ended because we couldn't maintain it, it wouldn't destroy me.

It actually happened multiple times, I'm fine with it. Do I miss them or feel nostalgic when I think about past experiences with them? Of course, I care about them as people.

But I'd feel the same about it even if we had stayed friends, because I obviously feel nostalgic with things I did with my current friends.

I just really don't have the ""need"" to have friends in my life. I'm not "attracted" towards them, I care about them and I like them, but it's just not the type of attraction or even love that society usually attributes to what (best) friends are supposed to be or behave like.

(Same for my family. I haven't seen some of them in years, I don't need to. I like them, I care about their wellbeing.)

You may be wondering, if that's my attitude towards friendships, how do I even have friendships.

They talked to me one day and we happened to keep talking because we liked what each other had to say. It's been years later, so it's safe to say that we still like each other, but not once have I ever initiated a friendship, funnily enough. All I did was just... reply or talk once and we kept talking and meeting up, and eventually we became friends, and because they know a lot about me and I about them, I care about them.

And this is what I think Senkū is like too.

He cares about his friends deeply and he obviously cares about his family too. But he doesn't feel any attraction to people. He never once had an "I need to be their friend" moment. He accidentally sort of becomes friends with them because of the situation they're in and then develops a friendship with them because they've been through a lot of things for multiple years.

How did he meet Taiju? Because Taiju saved his machinery. Senkū didn't have any friends prior to that. But then they talked and spent their childhood together and became friends.

Taiju introduced him to Yuzuriha, they talked, she helped with his experiments as well, and they too became friends.

Senkū not once initiated a friendship.

He may have approached some of them first, but not because he wanted to be their friend/felt platonic attraction, he just needed them for a plan, then he used them for his plans, but they stuck around and they talked and time passed.

If it comes to his plans or science, he talks first. If it comes to any "emotional" conversational topic, someone else initiates it.

Senkū just doesn't feel the need to have emotional connections, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't care about his friends or won't develop friendships, if that makes sense. He doesn't seek them, but if friendships happen to develop, he accepts it. He doesn't portray it outwardly, but deep within his heart he still cares.

Everyone in his life started out as an ally, it eventually became friendship. Senkū didn't recruit people because he wanted friends, he recruited them because he had a need for allies to wage war against Tsukasa, then Ibara, then Whyman.

You can even apply it to Senkū's relationship with Xeno, who is according to the fanbook one of Senkū's "closest relationships" (the other one being Byakuya). Senkū respects Xeno as a scientist and as the only NASA employee who actually helped him build a rocket, but even then it's because Xeno talked first and their relationship was strictly mentor and mentee, it was hardly a friendship in what society defines it as anyway. I guess the closest equivalent would be Marty McFly and Doc Brown from Back to the Future (I know, Marty isn't Doc's mentee, but it's about the assisting in science projects part), if it comes to media, but even then Senkū's and Xeno's mentorship would not fit the definition of friendship the way Marty's and Doc's does.

I also call Senkū loveless, because he would never enter a queer platonic relationship (qpr). Entering one would mean you experience a type of connection that is more than friendship, but not romantic or sexual. Or at least that's how I came to understand it. Personally, I'm still confused on what they're actually like aside from them developing from a "tertiary form of attraction". This is where angled and oriented AroAces come in, and why some people call themselves "AroAce lesbians" for example. They experience a different type of attraction towards women that's not just friendship, but it's also not romantic or sexual (at least that's how I understand it, any tertiary attraction feeling AroAces correct or explain it to me, because it's been confusing me for years).

Now look at Senkū and tell me that he'd ever enter such a relationship, when he barely feels the need to make friends on his own. He says it himself "love causes only problems" because of the emotions involved in it. He also, as we established, doesn't feel the need to make friends. If that's already too much and Senkū doesn't have the need for friends, and a QPR is similar, except it lacks the romantic and sexual part and is supposedly "more than a mere friendship", then Senkū definitely wouldn't have that.

I think it's important to mention that, but I think at this point it is obvious, I don't define attraction and caring as the same things.

Why would I? It isn't the same thing, otherwise we wouldn't have different words for it.

Attraction means I myself feel the need to be close to whatever attracts me, maybe that I can't stop thinking about it because I need it in my life, but it can also be superficial.

Care is that it doesn't cross my mind every day, but maybe I happen to think about it once because it crossed my mind, or if I'm with friends or family who tell me about something that happened to them, I care about their wellbeing.

You may also have noticed that I barely even used the word "love" despite talking about being "loveless". As I mentioned in the beginning, I really don't think it's the right term. We love. We care. But it's just not the love people think of first (aka romantic). I love my hobbies, I love my friends and family, I love my favourite characters. But none of this is what society tells me that love is supposed to be or feel like. But it's the most direct way of saying "I don't experience any type of attraction", as misleading as it is, sadly.

And that's it, basically.

Again, it's just my own definition and experience, so how true it is for the majority of AroAces or how much you agree with me, is totally up to you and anyone else. Emotional matters are confusing, and a lot of the time don't make sense and are hard to put into words, but I gave it my best shot with all I know right now. If you're curious or think that loveless may not be the right term after all, you're welcome to do more research on the terms angled and oriented, I bet there are a lot of AroAces who identify with those labels ready to help you out, and who know much more about it than me.

I hope I was able to help you in any way to find some clarity! Thanks again for stopping by, feel free to do that again any time!!

[teejaystumbles]

Hello,

Please don't take this any wrong way, I really don't ask this in an accusatory tone, only out of genuine curiosity. May I ask, why participate in a bang pre-matched with a writer? Isn't the point of it to bring together people who might not have encountered each other otherwise? And, from my point of view but I never participated in a bang before so I know nothing, to give a chance to small writers who don't get lot of attention, to work with an artist that might never have noticed and read their fic otherwise? I'm not sure what is the point in participating with someone you already know, and are free to make art for as often and whenever you wish, which you already do, and don't have a deadline hanging over your head for...

(I'm really happy with the artist that claimed my summary, but I can't help being a bit disappointed that there never was a chance you did if I'm completely honest, since you're never going to even notice my fics otherwise lol)

Wow. Okay. First off, this is also my first time participating in a Big Bang. Joining pre-matched is possible for a reason, to let people be creative together and be completely safe in the knowledge that you know you can work with the other. Also, no, while I can of course draw whatever I want for the people I know, it's not the same as having a project with a clear timeline and goal. It's as much an exercise for me and "my" author as it is for anyone else joining the bang. That's kind of the point, to have an outer force checking our progress. It's good! It helps stick to it and do something new, together.

Also:

Anon, I guess you didn't read what I wrote last in the fest-chatter...which was:

I am more than willing to take on other fics of authors! I was in fact sitting on my hands watching the claiming taking place because I'm not allowed to pick in the first round. I have submitted my choices in the second and have now a match. I hope you too have got one. If not, and now listen up because then you'll see there's no reason to accuse me of "withholding" (which is a bit rude, if also flattering) - if not, I think there are now only three or four fics unmatched) I am a RESERVE. Which means I have given permission to match me up to one other author who doesn't get a match.

Not only did I indeed want to pick up another fic from the list, and did, but I also let them put me on reserve exactly because I am pre-matched and I don't want anyone to not get an artist.

I'm not angry, you couldn't have known, but still. Please think about venting to artists like this. It puts us off illustrating things. We do this for fun, just like the writers. I know it's hard not to get your favourite artist? But that's just the nature of the big bang. If you're not happy with what you get, consider reaching out to artists you like for the next one.

[charlesmagnolia0312]

I'm an aspiring author

and illustrator and I've been working on a story for years. I've had my characters imagined since I was a kid, but I've never been able to put my thoughts into words. I'm a pretty good artist and I'm always drawing my characters, and I'm always coming up with new plot lines and ideas to add to the story to make it more immersive. I wish I had connections like a lot of famous authors do so that I could get my stuff out there. I post my art on Instagram and only get interactions from 7-20 people, twenty if I'm lucky. They're all my friends and family too. Not only do I barely get any interactions on my page, but when I post my stuff on Wattpad/AO3, I barely get anything there either.

I have dreams sometimes about how my life would be as a known author, as a known artist. I want my characters portrayed by people in movies and shows. I want to be known, and I want this to be my purpose. But I'm realistic. I know that I have to come back to reality, start applying for schools, get good grades, a degree. Everyday I'll have to wake up, work, and go to sleep like everyone else. There are too many stories and characters out there, we don't need more. Besides, I'm too young to even start writing seriously. There are people older than me who have a head start with this whole thing. If they want to write and get themselves published, they can. They're adults and I'm not. Listen, I know that just because an adult is an adult doesn't mean that they can get themselves published, but they are definitely taken more seriously than a teenager would be.

I see those videos that people make about how they got "published at 13" or whatnot, and I can't help but feel jealous. I think my writing is decent enough, but it sounds like it was written by a high schooler. On top of this, my parents only support me to a point. They just hope I have a fallback plan. I do, but it still hurts knowing that I most likely will never get to show everyone the characters that kept me here and happy throughout my life.

[practicingbushiho]

Actually, I love this post because I often think about the low hanging fruit that is blaming a lack of views and interaction on artists who draw R18 content-- let's debunk some myths about art careers online, shall we? Note that this is specifically about FREELANCING, not industry contract jobs.

So, it is clear that many SFW artists with no viewership are frustrated, and they feel bad that they can't/don't want to illustrate R18/furry content, and they want to believe that it's a problem they can blame on R18 artists because they were pedaled the idea that 'sex sells'. But its a yes, and

Because sex only sells if its corporate advertisement. Sex only sells if it's...well, sexless. Actual R18 artists and Sex Workers have to work painstakingly hard against algorithms AND the frankly grotesque judgment of their character by others, especially if they are artists that are queer, BIPOC, or explore non-conventional relationship models. Lord help them if they try to explore their trauma in any way with it either.

If you are an artist in general, the reason you don't get attention can vary pretty wildly. But it almost always one of these three things.

There are fucking millions of art pieces posted every day on the internet and it is quite literally impossible for the average person to remember or even genuinely LOOK at any of it, even the people who doom scroll all day

You are under the impression that your skill or effort entitles you to views or results-- it does not. If you are not making something that has an audience or demand, it will be much harder for you to tread water. You have to pivot to doing artwork and content that the average consumer would actually like to see if you want to see your work gain traction, become serialized-- which often means making artwork that you aren't always crazy about. That's why doing a career as an artist is STILL A JOB. Because no job is going to be doing shit you love all of the time, that is a lie. I love doing art more than anything; and for years I put up with drawing shit I didn't really care all that much about for sales. I don't take jobs I'm not crazy about anymore; but that also means I am WAY more broke than I could be. And finally...

You are doing pointless research into SEO or algorithms and try too hard to game the system, and then you get angry when you realize the system never actually worked for you-- just the corporations looking to get ad revenue off of your posts.

Listen. There is really only one thing you can control about any of this when you post your work online. And that is your feelings about it. Being an artist in general is very tumultuous existence, especially when it is your vocation, and it always has been-- most famous artists worked for decades before being noticed. Some of them DIED before they did.

You need to accept that most of us are NOT meant to be some sort of legend. Desire is not an occupation. Do not put your favorite artists on pedestals and falsely believe they only got there because they are good at what they do-- they also got incredibly lucky. And they KNOW it. I have heard a great many industry artists actually struggle with SURVIVORSHIP BIAS because they personally know practicing artists who they see as being more skilled than they are. But they didn't make it. For any number of reasons.

If doing art successfully as a financially stable or lucrative career is the only way you think you will be happy doing art... I would do some thinking on that if I were you.

If you can only stomach being an artist if your ideas are unique and interesting enough for people to invest in with no emotional connection from you, the artist, in that work? I would do some thinking on that too. Because nobody is going to brute force their way into being successful just because they have a good idea. Millions of us do.

And finally, if you are a sfw artist... stop blaming R18 artists when you don't get your desired interactions. We see you, and we're not faring any better than you are.

i think the meme that keeps getting posted in different forms abt how nsfw art gets more attention than sfw art might just be a lie.

[whatevercomestomymind]

I actually have an answer!

So "art theory" as we know it wasnt super common outside of the italian schools until after the 14th century for one.

Also, many illuminators were functionally illiterate. Nearly always, one monk would do the drawing and painting, another would do the gilding (the illumination part), and another would do the lettering.

Then add to that the history of traditional art in the regions that produced the majority of those bizarre looking animals: England.

England's native art form tradition called on Viking, Norse, Anglo, Celtic and Pictish art, much of which was rooted in stone carving and metalwork, both carved and cast. Out of necessity, these art forms were much less "realistic" than the artists might have wanted, however, within the constraints of the materials available to them in the late Iron Age, they created beautiful, if somewhat abstract, animal representations. These forms were also heavily influenced by the religious and spiritual beliefs of each group of native peoples.

So you had artists who had seen animals and people represented all their lives in this sort of fashion:

who were then bored out of their minds with repetition, not exposed to other methods of art, using tools that are EXTREMELY unforgiving (try drawing something in sharpie and be happy with it on the 1st try and you'll have an idea), on materials that were quite often extremely expensive and time consuming to make or obtain, trying to draw an animal that is never still except when you're not looking at it, and if it is still, it's asleep in a ball, which is very boring/difficult to draw anyway.

And ON TOP OF THAT, animals were representative- they werent just animals for the sake of drawing animals. Especially in illuminated texts, each type of animal, and the colors used to depict them, held specific meaning that the illiterate masses understood. It was another way of telling the story, or adding depth to it that someone who couldnt read, but had to listen to it, would be able to grasp. So animals had to have EXPRESSION. It helped to tell the story.

But sometimes, the difference between "oh so sexy mischievous mysterious expression" and "hurr-durr I'm a hors" is a single line that's off by 1/128 of an inch (ask any comic illustrator)!

And they couldnt just go "oh well, click undo". Nope. That page that now has the derpyest cat ever staring back at them probably cost a couple months worth of salary (if they were getting paid at all as is the case of monks). So they had to keep it. Or try to fix it and make it worse.

So basically we have the most wonderfully hideous animals thanks to ancient art tradition, shitty tools, expensive materials, and the still present today IDGAF of under-paid labor.

can someone please explain why tf medieval cat art looks like that