#the mess we leave behind

[nouvellesdumaquis]

Giorgio Alessani - The Mess We Leave Behind

Giorgio Alessani dévoile un album à la beauté romantique écrit pendant les semaines de pandémie : The Mess we leave behind qui sort le 01 mars 2024 sur le label Alfa Music. Magnifique album de jazz pour le musicien, chanteur, accompagné d'un groupe au sommet avec André Ceccarelli à la batterie, Cédric Hanriot au piano, M-Carlos au saxophone, et Rember Duharte à la trompette et avec la participation de la chanteuse Anne Sila.

The Mess We Leave Behind est le fruit d’un moment de la vie de Giorgio, passé dans une pièce, isolé du monde, à la recherche de nouvelles inspirations, de nouvelles mélodies et de nouveaux sons qui représentent au mieux ses pensées et ses émotions.

Chanteur à la voix splendide et aux musiques pleines de sensibilité, Giorgio Alessani s’installe comme une valeur sûre au milieu des chanteurs de jazz dans la lignée de David Linx. Compositeur, instrumentiste – pianiste et batteur – arrangeur, Giorgio Alessani nous offre avec ce dernier opus une création originale et un savoureux mélange de Jazz classique et d’harmonies contemporaines sur des textes écrits par le poète New Yorkais Cedric McLester.

A retrouver le 29 février 2024 sur la scène du Studio de l'Ermitage

[evilherehotel]

guys. guys the similarities. guys listen to me

[stardustandash]

Firstly, for my USian mutuals and followers, I am so sorry. I hope that they might find an error, that Trump may yet be kept out of office, but if not, I offer you support, solidarity and hopefully a safe haven on this blog and through fanworks. It's not much, but please let it be enough to keep you here, with a shred of hope to cling to, until we come out the other side of this dark time.

Secondly, fellow Canadians, please let this be a wake up call. Poilievre and the Conservatives are our no-name brand version of the Republican party and DO NOT think we are safe from the same kinds of hell our friends down south are experiencing just because we live north of the border. It is time to organize and fight the growing fascism in Canada. We cannot let our country slide down into a Conservative government.

[konohamaru-sensei]

Not to kill the big euphoria that's been in my dash since Saturday, but I (personally) did not like the ending of a rcane

[sunmoontruth-stiles]

I need a completely rewritten teen wolf series with Derek Hale as the main character. I think it would heal me.

[jaguarys]

For the record I don't think the Sannin had some sort of dramatic falling out. I think they grew apart in a way that they almost didn't notice. I think they found different interests, different people, and no matter how much they told themselves they were still as close as they'd always been they weren't. And I think it was a process of continually realizing these people aren't who you idealized in your mind; that they are maybe, kind of, sort of bad people; that they have done things you can't ignore, and that, maybe, they are your enemies. But there's no closure there. There's no sense of relief to be gained. Because you love them. You love them more than anyone in the world–– more than your students, more than your spouse, more than your family, more than your village. They know more about you than anyone ever will or ever could. They hold pieces of you, not only in your knowledge, not only in your youth, but in your soul, because they are one-third of it. You know them more, and less, than anyone could, and definitely more than you should

[soracities]

Hi! So I tried not to say anything about some anti makeup posts I saw on your blog but I need to say this. I think you're very wise and I agree it's very important for us to love ourselves as we are. But some people like myself doesn't care about 'empowering' of makeup or whatever but we just have fun with it and we just love it. I say we because I know there is a lot of people like me. Yeah, we are feeding capitalism or whatever, but world is beautiful and it's also terrible so people trying make themselves feel good, have fun, ect. I see a lot of people who don't wear makeup and i'm happy for them! I didn't wear makeup until i turned 20 i think and felt good.

One thing I wanted to add is in response of post about feminine girls. I think everything needs balance and sometimes people tend to overreact in their opinion and divide everything in black and white. Personally I never cared how women around me looked and what they were wearing. But I would like to have same treatment, and not to feel silly for wearing pink or feminine clothes.

Sorry, I don't know English very well so maybe I can't translate my idea entirely. What I'm trying to say i think everyone should do what they like and leave each other in peace.

Sorry for this essay, just wanted to share my point of view.

Hi, anon! I'm sorry for the delay in getting to this, but I appreciate you writing this (and your English was fine, don't worry)

I think the main argument of those posts (and my own feelings about this) is not about makeup on its own, or even judgement about who does and doesn't choose to wear it--what they are criticizing is a particular part of the society we live in which puts a huge emphasis on women's beauty and appearance in order to fulfill an idea of what a woman "should" be, and the role that makeup plays in that as a result. Because whether we like it or not, whether we believe in them or not, whether we feel pressured by them or not, these expectations do exist. How we personally respond to them does not change that.

I personally don't have an issue with makeup or the concept of it (in almost every culture on earth, humans have been using makeup of some kind for literally thousands of years)--but what I do have a problem with is when we treat makeup, or other traditionally "feminine" forms of expression as neutral things when they are not. A comb or a hair tie is neutral--it's just a thing. Lipstick and eyeliner are also just things, but only when they exist by themselves--and in reality they don't exist by themselves: they exist in a world where we value women on their physical appearance before we value them for anything else--lipstick and eyeliner exist to emphasise parts of your appearance, to make you look a certain way--and in a society where we put so much importance on women looking a certain way, they aren't just ordinary things you toy around with for fun. You can have fun with them, but it doesn't change their role. They can't be treated as exceptions from the world they are used in.

I think sometimes people assume that being anti-makeup is the same as being anti-women-who-wear-makeup, which misses the point (and also suggests a very dangerous idea which I think, sometimes, is why people respond so angrily to these criticisms: because if we believe that being anti-makeup = being anti-women, then therefore makeup = womanhood, and this is simply not true). Whether you wear these things just for fun and to enjoy yourself isn't what is being talked about because these criticisms are not about you on a personal level: they are about looking at a society that is as image-obsessed as ours, and asking why makeup has the role that it has when 1) it is almost exclusively aimed at women--women who, as a group, have been historically marginalised, and whose value, historically, has almost always been measured in terms of their beauty before anything else and 2) the makeup that is emphasized, the trends and styles that come and go, are often not so much about self-expression (if they were, people would be freely wearing all sorts of wild colours and styles: when we talk about "makeup culture" it's not the same kind of makeup used in the goth, punk, or alt scenes for example where makeup plays a very different role) but almost always about achieving or aspiring towards a type of beauty that is valued or expected: to make you look younger, to make your eyes brighter or larger, to make your lips bigger or sexier, your cheekbones more prominent etc--again, on their own, these things may not be a big deal, but they exist in a world where having these looks means you are valued in a certain way as a woman. And when this exists in our kind of world, where the power dynamics we have automatically mean women's perceived power is through beauty, and where we insist so much on women being a particular kind of beautiful (and this starts in childhood) we have to ask and investigate WHY that is--why this type of beauty and not another? why (almost only) women? who benefits from this? who suffers as a result?

The argument of "not all women" wear makeup for empowerment misses the point of these criticism, because it is focusing on a person's individual choices in a way that suggests our choices can define the world we live in, and they can't. We are deeply social animals. Therefore, how we appear to each other and to ourselves is a socially influenced phenomenon. This applies for race, for sexuality, and for gender. How women are perceived at large, in different social structures, is a social phenomenon influenced by the societies we exist in and the values of those societies. These criticisms are about the society we make those choices in and how that can affect us. For you, makeup may be something fun and enjoyable and that's fine. I'm not saying that's untrue or that people don't feel this way or that you are wrong for feeling this way. It's also not saying that you are brain-washed or oppressing yourself for it. But it doesn't change the world we live in. Someone feeling perfectly happy to go out with makeup or without makeup, and feeling no pressure to do either, is great--but it doesn't mean there aren't a lot of women who do feel pressured into wearing it, and that pressure is a social one. It doesn't change the inequality that exists between how women's physical appearances are judged compared to men's. It doesn't change the fact that almost every childhood story most kids hear (that aren't about animals) have a "beautiful princess" (and very little else is said about her except that she is beautiful) and a "brave" knight/prince/king/whichever: the princess (or maiden or whatever young woman) is defined by how she looks; the male in the story by how he acts.

It also doesn't change the fact that so many young girls grow up hearing the women around them criticize various parts of their bodies and that they carry this into their lives. It doesn't change the fact that we expect (in Western countries at least) for women to have criticisms about their appearance and they are "stuck-up" or "full of themselves" if they don't. It doesn't change the fact that magazines photos, red carpet photos, films, tv shows etc., feature actresses who are beautiful in a way that is absolutely above and beyond exceptional (and who either have had work done cosmetically, or are wealthy enough to be able to afford to look the way they do through top-class makeup artists, personal trainers etc) but who we think are within the "normal" range of beauty because faces like theirs are all that we see--how many famous actors / entertainers can you name who look like they could be someone's random uncle, or "just some guy" (writing this, I can think of 5). Now how many actresses, equally famous, can you think of that are the same? Very, very, very few.

The point of those posts, and why I feel so strongly about this, is that we have a deeply skewed view of beauty when it comes to women, because, as a society, we place so much on how they look in such a way that it is not, and was never meant to be, achievable: therefore anything that contributes to how women look, that markets itself in the way that the makeup industry does in this day and age, needs to be questioned and looked at in relation to that. No one is saying don't wear eyeliner or blush--what they are trying to say is that we need to be aware of the kind of world eyeliner and blush exists in, what their particular functions as eyeliner and blush do in the world that they exist in, that we exist in, and how this does impact the view we have on makeup as a result. Your personal enjoyment may be true to you and others, but this doesn't change the role of female beauty in the world because, again, our personal choices don't define the world in this way. Often, it's the other way around. And we cannot deny this fact because, while it may not affect you negatively, it does affect others.

I absolutely agree with you because I don't care how other women around me choose to dress or express themselves, either--that's their freedom to wear what they want and enjoy themselves and I want them to have that freedom. But my view is not the world's view, and it's certainly not the view of a lot of other people, either. I don't care if another woman loves pink and wearing skirts and dresses--but, like makeup, pink, skirts, and dresses, are not neutral things either. They're tied to a particular image of 'femininity' which means they are tied to a particular way of "being a woman" in this world. I'm not saying, at all, that it's wrong to wear these things. But I'm saying we can't treat them as though these are choices as simple as choosing what kind of socks to wear, because they aren't. They are choices that have baggage. If a woman is seen as being silly, childish, or treated unequally because she enjoys cute tops and ribbons and sundresses, that's not because we are demonizing her choices, or because being anti-makeup is being anti-woman (again, it is absolutely not): it's because we as a society demonize women for any choice. That isn't because of anti-makeup stances--that's because of sexism.

You mentioned that you want to be treated the same as anyone else for wearing feminine clothes--but the fear that you wouldn't be isn't because of the discussions critiquing makeup and other traditionally "feminine" things--it's because we live in a society where women are constantly defined by how they appear on the outside, and no amount of our personal choices will make this untrue. Whether you are a girly-girl or a tomboy, you'll always be judged. And, in reality, when women follow certain beauty standards they do get treated better--but this doesn't mean much in a society where the standards are so high you can never reach them, and where the basic regard for women is so low to begin with (not to mention the hypocrisy that exists within those standards). This is what all those criticisms towards makeup and "empowerment" are about: it's about interrogating a society that is built on this kind of logic and asking why we should insist on leaving it as it is when it does so much damage. It's saying that that if we want everyone to truly feel free in how they choose to present themselves we have to go deeper than just defining freedom by these choices on their own, and look at the environment those choices are made in. And that involves some deeply uncomfortable but necessary conversations.

Also, and I think this important to remember, views on makeup and the social place of makeup will also depend on culture and where you are, and the beauty expectations you grew up with. And when it comes to the internet, and given American dominance online, a lot of these posts criticizing makeup and the way makeup is being used to sell an idea that wearing it is "empowering" to the woman (which is basically saying: you are MORE of a woman when you wear it; you are stronger and more powerful because, in our society, beauty is portrayed as a form of power: it tells you, you can battle the inequality women face by embracing the role beauty plays in our lives but it doesn't tell you this emphasis on beauty is part of that inequality), are based on the way makeup is portrayed in mostly English-speaking Western countries. My views are shaped by what I grew up seeing, and while a full face of makeup (concealer, primer, foundation, mascara, highlighter, contour, blush, brow tint, brow gel etc) may not be daily practice or even embraced in a place like France or maybe other places in mainland Europe (but that doesn't mean they don't have their own expectations of feminine beauty), they are daily practice in places like the US and Britain, and this is what most of those posts and criticisms are responding to.

We can argue as much as we want about makeup, but when you grow up in a society where women feel the need to put on makeup before going to the gym there is something seriously wrong. Embracing makeup and enjoying makeup is one thing, but it cannot be a neutral thing when so much of it is about looking like you're not wearing makeup at all, or when we assume a woman is better qualified for a job or more professional when she wears it. It cannot be a neutral thing when a singer like Alicia Keys goes makeup-free for a red carpet event and it causes a stir online because people think she looks sick (what she looks like is normal--I would argue above normal--but wearing makeup to cover up "flaws" is so normal now that we genuinely don't know what normal skin is supposed to look like because the beauty of these celebrities is part of their appeal: they are something to aspire to). It is absolutely very normal for me, where I am, to see young girls with fake lashes and filled in brows: it's not every girl I pass, but it is enough. I'm not saying they are miserable, or brain-washed, or should be judged. I can believe that for them it's something enjoyable--but how am I supposed to see something like that and not be aware of the kind of celebrities and makeup tutorials that are everywhere on TikTok and YouTube, and that they are seeing everyday? How am I not supposed to have doubts when people tell me "it's their choice!" when the choices being offered are so limited and focused on one thing?

I never wore makeup as a teenager and I still don't, but a lot of that is because I grew up surrounded by people who just didn't. Makeup was never portrayed as anything bad or forbidden (and I don't see it like that either)--it was just this thing that, for me growing up, was never made to be a necessity not even for special occasions. I saw airbrushed photos and magazines all around me, for sure, and I definitely felt the beauty pressure and the body pressure (for example, I definitely felt my confidence would be better if I wore concealer to deal with my uneven skintone, and I felt this for years). But I also know that, growing up, I saw both sides. No makeup was the default I saw at home, while makeup was the default I saw outside. And that does play a part, not just in the choices you make, but in the choices that you feel you are allowed to make. No makeup was an option for me because it was what I saw everyday, even with my own insecurities; but if you do not see that as an option around you (and I know for most girls my age, where I grew up, it probably wasn't) then how can we fully argue that the decision you make is a real choice?

If I wanted to wear a cute skirt outside, for example, and decided to shave my legs--that isn't a real choice. And it cannot ever be a real choice, no matter how much I say "this is for me" or "I prefer it like this" because going out in public with hairy legs and going out in public with shaved legs will cause two completely different reactions. How can I separate what I think is "my choice" from a choice I make because I want to avoid the negative looks and comments? And how can I argue that choosing to shave is a freely made choice when the alternative has such negativity? If you feel pressured into choosing one thing over another, that's not a choice. Does this make sense?

This is how I feel about makeup most of the time, and what I want more than anything else is for us to be able to have a conversation about why we make the choices we do beyond saying "it makes me feel good" and ending the conversation there. Again, I'm not saying people need to stop wearing makeup or stop finding enjoyment in wearing it, but I think we tend to get so focused on our own feelings about this and forget that there is a bigger picture and this picture is a deeply unequal one. That is what this conversation is about. I hope this explains some things, anon, and if I misinterpreted anything please feel free to message me again. x

[duck-woamn]

My first theatre show has happened today. I actually think we did pretty good! Especially for a show with 3 different grades and different acting levels!

[adashofniallandasprinkleoflunacy]

home from work

[paracausalwraith]

i am soooo ready to move out

[in-tua-deep]

asleep me has just decided to start world building i guess

Imagine: you are a misfit teenage boy, a con artist. You have a best friend - or maybe a brother? You two are as close as family regardless. You're in a refugee camp when you pull a con - you pass your best friend off as the newly orphaned son of a noble or something. It's just a ploy - to give him an in with the other wealthy kids so you can steal.

Except… he doesn't really give it up? You ask a couple of times when you're leaving, but Will, your best friend, keeps putting it off. He's fallen in with a new crowd. One that respects him, elevates him. And those new friends? Well, they don't exactly like you.

Will starts sending you off on errands when he's with his friends. You go easily, because you want to be helpful, and you ignore the hushed laughter of his shiny new friends. You go on your fake little missions designed to get rid of you.

That's how you meet the Goddess.

Imagine a clearing, golden light, and a beautiful woman who calls you a trickster and says you are destined to be enemies. Imagine freeing the three chained sun gods by accident. (By fate?) Except you tell the goddess that you don’t believe in fate, and what if you become friends instead?

(You offer to steal her, and she agrees - a fine trick indeed, wouldn't you say?)

After this instance you find something out. You can use magic now? But also it seems like you have been cursed as well - you can’t die. Fate rearranges itself every time. A shield moves to a position it wasn’t in before. A sword misses its mark. You are Loved By Fate and it is an Issue.

Time passes and your best friend grows - and you have to use magic to grow with him. He’s a king now. You love him - he’s still your brother - but his smile is more and more strained every time he sees you.

Your goddess takes many forms travelling with you. Sometimes she is a woman, sometimes she is golden magic inside of a pouch. Sometimes she is a child and travels with you, and somehow you get separated with her like that. The king finds her, and immediately is taken with her. He decides to try and find a family for this child who is shy of everyone, and offers for any individual to come and try their luck to see if the child will take to them

You are the last person to try, not because you don't think your goddess will choose you, but because you are worried even if she does the king will not let her go

The king's friends stop you. You know their faces - they are the same bullies they have always been. They accuse you of being cursed because you never die no matter how many dangerous missions the king sends you on. The suicide missions.

They attack you, and they might be cruel but they aren’t stupid. Their ringleader realizes that it must be magic shifting his shield to protect you from the lethal blows.

(You can see every lethal blow that doesn’t land play through your head. The worlds that did not come to pass. You don’t tell them the number of times they murdered you in this fight. It wouldn’t change anything.)

You manage to escape and run up to the king’s room. Using fate’s magic so much has stripped you away of other magics - you look young again. Awkward and gangly with no facial hair (the way you always have since meeting a goddess and becoming something more than human)

He’s in there with an elven woman, a noble of some kind who is wise and anyone with eyes can see the king is in love with her. (You can see in her eyes that she does not love him back, not in that way.)

The king, after some debate, decides to let you try

(He doesn’t comment on your appearance - maybe he just thinks you have a baby face without your beard. Maybe the way he avoids looking you in the eyes means he doesn’t even notice.)

You reunite, and it is beautiful - your goddess surges forward into your arms and kisses you, and you feel fates magic coursing through you and soothing over the exhaustion from the fight.

But the king doesn’t see a goddess and he doesn’t see the magic - he sees a child and he draws his sword. He says many things - that he didn’t expect you to stoop this low. That he once called you his friend.

(How long has it been since that felt genuine?)

Something goes cold in you and enough is enough. Your goddess’s magic courses through you, and you will not be separated again. You use magic to blast them back, use magic to stun them, and use magic to make you and your goddess into a rat that scurries away into the walls

The magic is powerful enough that a cascade of golden chains has manifested down the wall of the room, branching downward like a geometric tree and each one tipped with an amulet with a large inset ruby

The king and the noble awaken, and the king is furious. But the elven woman looks like all her questions have been answered

She talks about how there haven’t been terrible fires throughout the lands, despite all signs pointing to the fact that the sun gods have been unchained

She names you - trickster, calamity

In mythology apparently you are symbolized by a massive golden peacock, each "feather" in your tail with ruby-gem eyes like the chains on the wall

You are named such because you are the only creature capable of going against fate and changing it

(your train of feathers is instead a train of chains - all the fates that you have broken)

(It should make you enemies with your goddess, but you decided in that clearing twenty years ago that you were friends instead)

Apparently on your suicide missions, you have been helping. Wherever you could, you changed the fate of entire cities and towns and prevented the wildfires of the Sun gods from ravaging the kingdom

The elven woman opens a portrait that has a nook behind it. You are sitting there - well, not you exactly. But a copy of you. You are a trickster and love mischief, and you love secret spaces and those who choose to look in them. That’s enough for a part of you to be present, looking sixteen and glowing with golden light

She speaks in the ancient language to you - and you speak it back without thinking. You tell her she’s just as hot as Will with a wink and it makes her laugh. Will cannot understand what you are saying, but you don’t care right now. He’s your best friend, but you aren’t his, and it hurts

He calls you immature, and the elven woman says you’re only sixteen. He snaps back that you are a thirty-six year old man. She shakes her head, and says that you haven’t been since you Awakened. Gods are different, after all

(Maybe it was the differences that drove you apart? Maybe it’s your fault? But if that is the truth then why was there already so much distance between you? You do not ask your goddess if there was a path where you still would have been close.)

You don’t feel like a god, you feel like a person who is just trying their best. You feel tired. You feel sad. Maybe that’s why you are the one who bends fate - you’re the only one that cares enough to try.

Anyway that’s when I woke up but I like my trickster - important to note that he is a redhead with a bit of a baby face

[p-receh]

Hi! No neg to you at all but i really need to get this out so feel free to ignore :D

I feel like fandoms as a whole has started to become WAY too comfortable in telling their creators what to do. The drama, complaints, and overall neg that i've seen people spewing to monsta is disheartening.

Critics are fine here and there, especially when mentioned in a respectable way. But people seem to forget that nothing is perfect, they see a flaw and just... zero in on it

Monsta can't satisfy everyone. Heck NO creator can satisfy everyone, but complaining about the thing something is lacking and saying negative things about the creators is helping absolutely NO ONE.

If anything it makes the creators ignore you, at worse double down or get disheartened and stop creating as a whole. Other than that it creates a negative sphere that makes some people (who were fine and enjoying this thing they like) to also feel unsatisfied or be negative as well.

ITS RUINING THE FUN FOR EVERYONE

I feel like these people don't realize how HARD it is to create let alone make a show.. its actually something i've realized in media consumption over the years; people have consumed so much media that they believe they "know whats best" or "understand better how to create this and that"

Creating is not easy. It takes time. It takes skill. WRITING isn't easy. ART isn't easy. ANIMATING isn't easy.

You want a specific episode that cater to what you like and how you want the characters to be? Write it. Genuinely write it.

Thats what fanart is for, fanfiction, fananimation.

Want something? Make it yourself. People have been spoon feed with free content that includes 3 seasons worth of a show, 2 seasons of its sequel show, 2 movies, AND comics.

And again. THESE ARE ALL FREE.

People do not REALIZE how privileged they are.

Do you know how many content now that is under a paywall? Do you know how incredible and generous it is to be given free content of an animated show for years?

To be given a show that is so obviously made with passion and love?

And still having the nerve to complain that its not the way how some people want or like it to..

Write it. To those who fully believe they know how things should be created, then do it yourself. Make a script and give it to them. Make a fanfic. Make an AU. Make art. MAKE WHAT EVER IT IS YOUR COMPLAINING ABOUT OR MADE YOU DISSATISFIED

Sorry about the long rant, this is in no way directed to you, been really peeved with how ungrateful people have been (getting that much free content in anything is a privilege some do not realize). Thinking its so easy to make a free show.

Anyway can't wait to see the continuation of your AU :D

Allahuakbar—THAT'S A LONG TED TALK wwwwwwwww X'D

Lmao I was not ready for a minute with how long your ask was, so of course I couldn't ignore this! wkwkwkw

Ehem.

Truuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 100%!

I am new to this fandom but it genuinely got me a headache. Even with the recent drama "Boboiboy is more likely a fan service franchise now!" or "Why monsta always treat Boboiboy only and abandoning their supporting characters? This is why Ejen Ali is better!" and many other drama that I don't need to know in the past.

Like... Puh-lease. Don't you guys know how much it blessed that they released their show full HD on YouTube? Both TV and movie series? Released their comic on webtoon for free?

Maybe you guys didn't realize how illogical that sound for outside of... I dunno, maybe from sea countries. Like Japan with their infamous strict rules for any franchise when they promote their products.

(and with how ridiculous what had westerns entertainment corporations did to consumers, so pirating on us and Europe almost became a norm?)

Monsta I'd say is genius. They knew they cannot apply the same way with how the Japan did, and thus they find a way to make their show release without losing any money. Even me personally still find that strategy is "somewhat" illegal. But for SEA countries? I can understand why they choose this path. Because that's how The some of franchises from my country did that too to promote their products.

Buuuut does it make the corporate go impecunious?

Now that my friend, it all comes down with the quality and the general public reception themselves.

(I can give you examples buuuut it gonna be longer and might subjective since I don't have any uh... Marketing background knowledge)

Therefor Monsta creatively managed to survive that obstacle. Their shows already big enough across the SEA nations and beyond; their comics and card battle themselves are heavily sold out, and even managed to release on theater in Japan!

Aaaaaaaaand then again, anon. This is internet.

Sometimes criticism could cause endless of drama that never ends. And it's absolutely unhealthy. Uurggh..

Yet in rare occasions, consumer criticism had their own benefits. Like the infamous Gremlin Movie Sonic before Paramount had to change because of the internet. (HUGE internet criticism If you guys don't know)

It really is a gamble to take any discourse if their take was supporting and even disowning some product. Especially on the internet where you could freely critics without hearts content.

I admit I myself have my complaints but tbf, at the of the day I don't mind with what Monsta give to their product. In fact, I respect with how much they take risk to correcting their mistakes from the very first Boboiboy Series up until now.

Nobody's perfect anyway, so I highly appreciate it they way Monsta tried to please anyone.

But that's the beauty of the Fan Art. Whether in form of music, visuals, literary, and any kind of medium to ensure that franchise still has an active community with tons of new ideas to share for their franchises. Big or small.

Fan art for me is a clarification whether the franchise is acceptable to their target market or not. If no one creates it, I consider that franchise is failure and not exist.

"The difference between fanfic and a "real" novel is that fanfic is honest about its inspiration."

-Mary Robinette Kowal

"There's a time and place for everything, and I believe it’s called 'fan fiction'."

-Joss Whedon

Tho...

Why would someone would want to waste their talents for creating fan art that they didn't even like it at first?

I specifically refer to people who made fan art clearly for hate or trigger people who liked it, not for earning money(that's another story to tell)

What a pity to waste time, ya know?

Like, touch some grass dude :/

[mushlooms]

cr3 thoughts, but if any of the bells hells ever truly die die … guys ashton is gonna break

[maliciousalice]

How the hell did Acensia get back to the Delta Quadrant / Solum with no warp and only a coffin sized vessel? Ain't no way she authentically beat Gwyn there who was equipped with a warp capable vessel**

So now there are two things that sort of call into question the integrity Janeway's worries in Voyager. 1. If a robot can zoom from the Alpha Quadrant allllll the way back to Solum in the Delta Quadrant no fucking problemo, then what was Janeway sooking about in Voyager. 2. If a man and his hologram can survive alone for 10 years, then why was Janeway so lonely during her 7 year long journey with an entire crew compliment. Gosh. **I'm not looking for a hackneyed answer, like 'maybe Acensia's robot used the transwap hubs'' Oh, did she? Was her coffin equipped for that? Or ''maybe she stole a ship'' When? Where? ''The Vau Nakat's technology is superior maybe--'' Nah, nah, nah they couldn't even leave their own orbit let alone utilize wormholes. Ain't no way. Make it make sense!!!!!! I understand that not everything has to be shown but sometimes it should be. They should have taken their time with things like this because it accidently has dire ramifications.

[psalmsofpsychosis]

Some Batman: Telltale thoughts

[this is a Batman Telltale critical post, ye be warned.]

So. There are perhaps no words in the english language to describe with how stupid i feel right now.

I started Telltale Batman because i thought that it's one of the more distinct unconventional Batman narratives that would let you have a more interesting, complex and nuanced relationship between Bruce and Joker— the game even lets you bring all of Bruce's sincere hypocrisy and sentimental selfishness to the surface and have him admit that yes, he can fight the rogues gallery because it takes a madman to know a madman; to love a madman. For a moment i geniunely thought that i can escape the everpresent shadow of DC hays code in the freakshow funhouse that is Batman comics, i thought Telltale had done something different.

But telltale's approach to The Enemy Within is so flaky and flimsy and timid at best— such noncommittal twist on themes of pain and grief. They take on a hefty plotline, "what does it take to actually fight through evil and be surrounded by it? How long does it take before your resolve and your selfhood cracks? When you lose the mask, which one did you truly lose— The ideal persona, the superhero, the crusader, or the person underneath, the casket that holds all your humanity and your heart and your hopes? How long can you stare onto the abyss before it stares onto you?" It's indeed a very Nietzsche approach to Batman— except that a good Nietzsche narrative takes a lot of intentional plot points and honesty of thought and of heart. And Telltale doesn't commit, not to Bruce's characterization, and not to any other character, and definitely not to Joker's journey in any variation of it. The existence of the Vigilante route is useless on every front; Joker is going to turn into a villain anyway, just with a different hello kitty eyeshadow palette and an extra bland consolation lollipop. No good choice Bruce makes on Joker's behalf affects anything whatsoever, and i particularly love the "community and friendship and sympathy do not help the mentally ill and all that ever works is punishment and shock therapy and confinement and loneliness" message the vigillante route puts on the table, charming charming status quo commandments from DC as always.

Telltale Batman could only be revolutionary if it had dared to break comic convention and let the vigillante route play out like Selina and Bruce's relationship always does; very grey morality, irrational, full of tension and trust, unstable, intriguing, inexcusable, irreversible, unavoidable and heartfelt, human. But we can't have nice things in batmanverse, so both Joker routes run on stuck gears and topple and fall into a predictable narrative hole that neither Bruce nor Joker can claim out of.

And on the predictable front? this story is too lukewarm to be a good time for me personally. When you get 84 Batman comics per minute every other Tuesday, all ending the same way no matter whatever the fickity happens inbetween, you have to pull no punches. This is my 53368532th Batman-with-tragic-batjokes-implications read of the week, say something new or forever hold your blue-balling silence, i dont care.

[faebriel]

hgs brainrot has returned due to tbosas .. speaking of hgs here’s an ask abt the hgs au: if things were totally different, and Wilbur were to be a 12 victor, what do you think a possible mentor-tribute dynamic would look like between him & Niki? I feel like it would be similar to Snow & Lucy in the way that he’s just going out of his way to cheat n help her

anon u have in fact struck jackpot because this is a concept i was spinning some thoughts abt before bee mentioned avoxes and we went OOOOH at that!!! so yes i have considered rainduo as a mentor-tribute dynamic and would love to talk about that concept too :]

so for this concept i think wilbur and niki would be close friends throughout childhood from 12, and then in their teens wilbur is reaped and, well, no one has particularly high hopes (he's a writer and a musician at heart, not a fighter) but through sheer trickery and dumb luck, he makes it to the end of the games. wilbur pulled some pretty fucked up tricks to win - when you can't use brute force, you have to use your brain - and partly due to the trauma of the games, partly due to his shame and survivor's guilt, he sinks into the capitol and relishes a new life there as a socialite. to him, the old wilbur died in the games and the new one has taken his place - to niki, and to his other friends in 12, whatever the games did to him made him into every vapid heartless capitol victor there is.

or. niki has her doubts. they all saw how horrible the games were, but surely there is some part of him left, some part that's hurting, even if it's buried deep?

anyway.

like og spin of the au, niki is reaped and this sucks - this time she does expect wilbur as her mentor on the train, and she expects some kind of warm welcome (maybe even an apology for leaving them so suddenly and silently? an explanation?) but she gets jack shit. wilbur is jaded and cruel and unrecognisable and niki entirely hates it. this is the part where i REALLY WISH we got some time of those two beefing with each other directly in canon (or at least interactions while niki was So Mad at him) but it's okay we fly blind. niki feels abandoned, lonely, thrown off of her kilter - she expected an ally in this place, but she doesn't recognise the person wilbur has become. she doesn't recognise his shallowness (...much), his ruthless advice for the arena, the way he doesn't seem to care for anything. she's scared and now she's lonely and it pisses her off - their mentorship is fraught. here are some thoughts from discord on that:

i tend to think of niki as a bit naïve before l'manberg or even doomsday - i think this is an au where this streak would come out real strong, and niki is stubborn that she can get through the games without losing herself. stubborn that she can stop things, that she can protect people. i don't think wilbur is cold enough (or, really, can bear to say aloud) to say that her odds in the arena are slim enough as it is, but he definitely tells her that she's making enemies and that her odds of survival dwindle with the more trouble she causes.

beyond that... hm. niki's trust in wilbur is almost unshakeable until nov 16, even when she outright says she doesn't recognise him anymore. i think she'd reluctantly listen re: don't burn down any buildings, but she would grow bolder each day she had to stay in the capitol. she gets more honest in front of the cameras. she makes more friends in training, and not the ones wilbur recommends. she throws barbs at him every time he makes one of those callous, cold-hearted comments about other tributes and rankings and odds. and besides, she's going in the arena this time, not him. she needs to practice her bravery.

it's like... she hasn't given up on him. she thinks the old wilbur is in there somewhere. (she is wrong. that is not how trauma works.) but she won't hold her tongue just because she

for extra angst points could definitely play up the whole 'feeling abandoned' angle between them as niki goes into the arena - probably due to how fraught their friendship gets leading up to the games. niki wants to focus on them and their friendship, wilbur has stringently cut off (almost) everything from 12 and refuses to let her in; he tells her to behave for the cameras, she tells him she never will. i think the last point in that screenshot would also make for a super tasty argument where niki feels wilbur has gone astray, that he's abandoned 12, and that he'll probably do nothing but sit on his ass and watch her die and he can't even bring himself to care about her anymore, can he? just more fodder for the arena. and honestly, i think wilbur would passively agree with most of that - he values niki's opinion, after all, even now, and if she says he's rapidly descending into a lost cause then she must be right. and it's niki, so she will be fine, and he goes to his bedroom that night and tries to pretend he is sleeping perfectly fine instead of feeling paralysed with fear.

okay now onto the games - YES HE SO WOULD. or at least i think he would go out of his way to help. as for cheating - he's a recent victor for 12 and i think he would value tommy (no doubt a link to him... i think they'd be in touch in this au also) too much to risk the punishment falling onto him as well. i get the vibes this is a games closer to 74th than 10th, so there are far fewer opportunities to cheat and the consequences of getting caught are higher. but schmoozing up sponsors? making stupid ass radio interviews or whatever to talk up niki's odds? sharing anecdotes from their childhood - some real, some entirely fabricated - across capitol airwaves to stoke their sympathy? 100%. with less to lose in this au, i think niki would be far less inclined to play nice for the cameras - i hope you starve, she spits at one of them, and wilbur appears on a talkshow two days later as she scrambles for survival in the arena to talk up how she always saved loaves from the bakery for the poorest mothers and children in 12. he borrows and begs and swindles to the point where it feels like cheating. but hey, this new wilbur is capitol-branded. he knows how to play the game.

if anything he probably sinks into the game a little too much. self-preservation is not his forte. probably wracks up a few heavy debts and favours to owe, but those are not priority until niki is out of the arena, alive. as long as she wins, and as long as the family he has isn't in danger, he will manage. wow it would suck if at some point those two goals became impossible to co-achieve. anyway

i kind of see niki's victory in the arena being similar to the one in the main au - if only because planning out an entire games is hard for meee >-< . she walks in bolder and braver for sure, and with a less strategic pick of allies, but they all get picked off and she spends a few weeks so terrified she can barely sleep and then she ruptures some fuel line and sets the arena alight with a fire that burns brighter and more ravenously than it should. but she wins, and she's airlifted out of a filthy, muddy creek she had resigned herself to die in, and wilbur barges his way through as many peacekeepers so that he can actually see her with her burnt skin and hair and unfocused eyes and trust that what was on the screens wasn't a fluke, and that they made it. and then it's just a matter of surviving the after.

i'm sure there are some other random quirks or tidbits i can think of re: this take on a c!rainduo hunger games au but these are my base thoughts!!