#this is such an incredibly illogical yet incredibly common argument

[anghraine]

Today's unhinged "good God I hate how much extreme generosity I'm expected to extend to the Peter Jackson films by people who make wildly bad faith arguments about things I like" rant:

I am very deeply tired of people insisting with zero evidence that of course the LOTR films are imperfect, but the difficulties of adapting LOTR are such that it wasn't possible for them to be better than they were—in, apparently, any respect. They just couldn't be done better, at all, because it was so hard to make something watchable at all.

This is always just like ... really? Really?? Just what prevented them from making better decisions about anything? What exactly made casting every actor of color as barely differentiated villainous hordes in the twenty-first century so necessary and unavoidable? The glamorization and vast expansions of battle scenes and insertion of "heroic" war crimes was the highest film as a medium could aspire to in the early 2000s because of what insuperable force?

What made it impossible to give Arwen a coherent character arc? The films could not have been made without the underlying assumption that most of the cast are NPCs who will only do the right thing, when they will, if prodded or manipulated or influenced by main characters? In what way is this an inevitability of adaptation or film that simply couldn't have been conceptualized differently, much less better?

There is zero explanation or justification for why any of this stuff (or the myriad other flaws) had to be that way and couldn't have been done better in any way at any point. It's just stated that the films that exist must be the best films that could have existed because they're the ones that do exist and are popular. QED.

That doesn't make any sense, though, and it doesn't convince anyone who doesn't already agree. The idea that they could not have been better in any way (including their worst quality, which again, is the extremely racist casting), that some force was preventing not only the actual filmmakers but any filmmakers that could possibly exist from doing anything better just seems patently absurd.

You can like them and respect what they did achieve without demanding that everyone buy into a baseless and irrational argument that their pop culture success means nothing about them could possibly have been done any better. Look, I was in my mid to late teens at the time. I remember the early 2000s quite well. It wasn't now, but we are not talking about an age so divorced from our own that any of these things were somehow fundamental to the media landscape.

There are ways in which the LOTR films were very good that were essential to their popularity then and now. This does not require anyone to accept that it was literally impossible for them to be better than they are or that some defense is required against every criticism of them ever.

I am not, incidentally, talking about removing Bombadil, an entirely understandable and defensible decision that the film defenders in my notes somehow always feel the need to bring up. I know that changes had to be made, that adaptation is not a word for word transcription, that it would always be a difficult text to adapt, that structurally minor elements had to go, that they are cinematically beautiful films that a lot of work and love went into. I know this. EVERYONE knows this, because for the last 20 years it's been impossible to criticize anything about them without being reminded. Their accomplishments, and their existence, do not mean that any choice made by the filmmakers must definitionally have been the right call and could not possibly have been better in any way.

[dragonologist-phd]

OC Personality Test

Tagged by @rannadylin!! thank you, I love these things! I’ll tag @malkavianfledgling @undyingembers and I’ll tag back @rannadylin if you want to do it for another character!

Here are the rules:

1. Go to this website.

2. Choose an OC and take the test for them.

3. Put their stats here.

Nona

Architect: INTJ-T

Role: Analyst, Strategy: Constant Improvement

29% EXTRAVERTED | 71% INTROVERTED

66% INTUITIVE | 34% OBSERVANT

64% THINKING | 36% FEELING

82% JUDGING | 18% PROSPECTING

49% ASSERTIVE | 51% TURBULENT

(very strong on the introverted and judging aspects, which makes sense, and practically right in the middle between assertive and turbulent!)

throwing a few more details under the cut!

Strengths:

Quick, Imaginative, and Strategic Mind

“Highly curious and always up for an intellectual challenge”- yep, that’s Nona!

High Self-Confidence

“Architects trust their rationalism above all else, so when they decide something, they have no reason to doubt their decisions or insights”- (*remembers Meren trying to get Nona to convert* ooh yeah that’s pretty accurate)

Independent & Decisive (very Nona!)

Hard-Working & Determined

“If something grabs their interest, Architect personalities can be very dedicated to their work. They often put in long hours and intense effort. Architects are goal-oriented, and if tasks lead to something clear and relevant, they strive to accomplish those tasks. “ - incredibly accurate!

Open-Minded

“Architects are open to new ideas as long as they’re argued well” (eh, not quite so sure about this one...)

Jack of All Trades 

“Because of Architects’ open-mindedness, willpower, independence, confidence, and planning abilities, they are capable of doing anything they set their minds to. Skilled at hacking anything life throws their way, Architects are able to break down and learn from almost any system. They then use the ideas found there wherever they’re needed.” (she does have a wide array of skills ranging from etiquette to daggers!)

Weaknesses:

Arrogant

“...rejecting the opposing opinions of those they believe to be intellectually inferior.” (yeah I can see it)

Judgemental

“Architects have complete confidence in their thought processes because rational arguments are almost by definition correct – at least in theory. In practice, emotional considerations and history are hugely influential. A weak point for people with the Architect personality type is that they brand these factors and those who embrace them as illogical. They often dismiss them as people who think in an inferior way.” (yep, that makes sense)

Overly Analytical

“A repeated theme when discussing the strengths of Architects is their analytical skills. But this strength can fail them when logic isn’t the most important factor. Relationships, in all their complexities, often resist neat explanations.”

Loathe Highly Structured Environments (this one doesn’t apply quite as much)

Clueless in Romance

“Having a new relationship last long enough for Architects to understand what is going on and how to behave is difficult. Trying harder in the ways that Architects are used to can only make things worse, and, unfortunately, it’s common for them to simply give up the search for love.” (this one cracks me up, although they do have a point...how long did Nona pine for Thaos before anything happened? XD)

And a few highlight from the rest of her description, because there’s some stuff in here that fits her very well!

“People with this personality type are imaginative yet decisive... ambitious yet like their privacy... curious about everything but remain focused.”

“ Architects move through life as though it were a giant chessboard, advancing and retreating with considered intelligence. This personality type always looks for new tactics, strategies, and contingency plans. They constantly outsmart their peers as they maintain control, all the while making the most of their independent style of thinking. With this, they can achieve any goal they apply themselves to.”

“For Turbulent Architects, many of their best efforts come from concerns about real or perceived shortcomings. This may push them to work harder and be more meticulous in an attempt to do better or make things better. These personalities are more thorough – not despite the fact that they worry, but because they do worry.”

“ they are most attractive when they aren’t trying to be attractive, most appealing when they are doing what they do best. Generally, that means working in a familiar environment where their confidence and intelligence can shine.”

[onisionhurtspeople]

Hey, I really appreciate your psychoanalysis of Greg’s most troubling traits. They’re very insightful and you definitely know what you’re talking about. I was wondering if you have any theories on why Greg is so obsessed with ‘honesty’ and why he uses it as an excuse so much even though it’s so clearly hypocritical? Sorry if you’ve covered it before and I just missed it!

You sent me this question a couple of weeks ago, and I’m sure you’ve been wondering why it’s gone unanswered even though I’ve responded to some of the other submissions in my inbox. The reason it took me so long to respond is because I’ve been thinking about this question for probably the better part of two years, and I wasn’t really sure what my opinion on the subject was - his responses seemed all over the place, and I just could never quite pin down whether or not his insistence upon total honestly was just him being manipulative, or whether he just genuinely is not capable of honest, unbiased self-reflection.

..That is, until recently, when Greg released his documentary about Shane Dawson. It didn’t present any new information that we haven’t already heard from him, but his documentary did reveal one very significant piece of information that I’ve always suspected about Greg, but never quite had the proof for until now; and that information also happened to be the key to answering this question of yours that I’ve been thinking about for such a long time: why does Greg place so much emphasis on being honest when it is clear to even the most casual of observers how incredibly dishonest he is? So I’m going to try and outline my impressions for you, and keep an open mind as to whether or not I’m correct; but I think he has finally, and unintentionally, tipped his hand, and given me enough information to draw this conclusion once and for all: that not only is Greg extremely dishonest, but he is also completely and totally aware of how conniving and manipulative he is.

For a very long time, I couldn’t decide whether or not Greg was aware of how dishonest he was. It seemed impossible to me that anybody could contradict themselves as badly as he does and not be aware of it, and yet his continued insistence upon “brutal honesty” (and how angry he gets at other people when he thinks they’re lying) seemed to contradict that. The fact that he was a narcissist had me leaning towards the position that he wasn’t aware of his own hypocrisy in this area, until a couple of things happened that convinced me otherwise. The first (and admittedly least reliable) indicator was the body language that he displays in videos and during debates when he’s in the middle of being consciously dishonest; the second was something that he said to Adrienne, and which she then relayed in her now infamous letter outlining her three-week relationship with Greg; and the third and final nail in the coffin was something he said in his recent Shane Dawson documentary.

I won’t spend too much time going over his body language, because it’s pretty subjective (and very subtle and easily missed besides); but one of the very first things I ever noticed about Greg - even before I was aware of his personal history - was how much of his intentions he gives away in his facial expressions. When Greg is lying, manipulating, or has an ulterior motive, he almost always adopts a look on his face that indicates his intention to lie, and (from what I’ve read) is a very common behavior among narcissists and sociopaths. He begins to smirk and his eyes squint for the briefest moment before he regains control and tries to adopt a more neutral, passive, and sincere appearance. This is a microexpression called duping delight, a briefly flashed smirk caused by the pleasure of successfully manipulating others. He does this constantly throughout his YouTube videos…

Ironically, this screenshot was captured about ten seconds before he called himself a “raging narcissist”:

…and was even described in detail by Lainey’s most recent girlfriend (and Greg’s latest failed attempt at incorporating a third into their relationship), Maya.

The second thing that clued me in to Greg’s awareness of his own dishonesty was when he admitted to Adrienne, during the second week of their relationship, that he was aware of his tendency to be an extremely conniving and manipulative person. Clearly he’s aware of this tendency of his if he’s willing to admit it to Adrienne (even if his admission was just another manipulation tactic).

Adrienne’s full letter can be found here, for those who haven’t yet read it.

The final nail in the coffin that finally convinced me that Greg is fully aware of what he’s doing was the way that he presented his argument in his Shane Dawson documentary. His arguments in that video acknowledge a level of nuance that I’ve NEVER seen him delve into before in the 7+ years I’ve been observing him. I think this was an attempt on his part to come off as being unbiased and reasonable, but if you read between the lines a little bit, the fact that the style of argumentation that he displays in this “documentary” diverges so dramatically from his regular MO is extremely telling as its absence in his regular behavior. What this tells me is that he IS capable of injecting nuance into his opinions, and he IS capable of acknowledging alternative perspectives - it’s just that he chooses NOT to, because it’s much easier to manipulate people when you only introduce them to false black and white dichotomies where you present a lot of manipulated evidence for one, and make the other choice sound completely unreasonable and illogical.

So, why do I think that Greg insists on honesty when he himself is so blatantly and prolifically dishonest? In my opinion, his preoccupation with honesty is nothing more than yet another manipulation tactic to place himself in a strategically advantageous position by intentionally attracting those who are drawn to his “Always be honest” ideology. The people who do this never keep their word themselves, but they will surround themselves with people who do keep their word - and use their words against them - but never feel that they need to be accountable to their own. They go out of their way to attract those who are honest themselves so that they can always be sure of the honesty and integrity of those individuals. It is truly a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” scenario, and Greg has managed to find a way to surround himself with sheep so that he can prey on them more easily.

[duraxxor]

INTJ-T, The Architect

“Thought constitutes the greatness of man. Man is a reed, the feeblest thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed.”

It’s lonely at the top, and being one of the rarest and most strategically capable personality types, Architects know this all too well. People with the Architect personality type are imaginative yet decisive, ambitious yet private, amazingly curious, but they do not squander their energy.

“Nothing Can Stop the Right Attitude From Achieving Its Goal.”

With a natural thirst for knowledge that shows itself early in life, Architects are often given the title of “bookworm” as children. While this may be intended as an insult by their peers, they more than likely identify with it and are even proud of it, greatly enjoying their broad and deep body of knowledge. Architect personalities enjoy sharing what they know as well, confident in their mastery of their chosen subjects, but they prefer to design and execute a brilliant plan within their field rather than share opinions on “uninteresting” distractions like gossip.

“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”

Architects are defined by their tendency to move through life as though it were a giant chess board, pieces constantly shifting with consideration and intelligence, always assessing new tactics, strategies and contingency plans, constantly outmaneuvering their peers in order to maintain control of a situation while maximizing their freedom to move about.

This isn’t meant to suggest that Architects are without conscience, but to many other types, Architects’ distaste for acting on emotion can make it seem that way, and it explains why many fictional villains (and misunderstood heroes) are modeled on this personality type.

Architect Strengths

Quick, Imaginative and Strategic Mind – Architects pride themselves on their minds, taking every opportunity to improve their knowledge, and this shows in the strength and flexibility of their strategic thinking. Insatiably curious and always up for an intellectual challenge, Architects can see things from many perspectives. Architect personalities use their creativity and imagination not so much for artistry, but for planning contingencies and courses of action for all possible scenarios.

High Self-Confidence – Architects trust their rationalism above all else, so when they come to a conclusion, they have no reason to doubt their findings. This creates an honest, direct style of communication that isn’t held back by perceived social roles or expectations. When Architects are right, they’re right, and no amount of politicking or hand-holding is going to change that fact – whether it’s correcting a person, a process, or themselves, they’d have it no other way.

Independent and Decisive – This creativity, logic and confidence come together to form individuals who stand on their own and take responsibility for their own actions. Authority figures do not impress Architects, nor do social conventions or tradition, and no matter how popular something is, if they have a better idea, Architects will stand against anyone they have to in a bid to have it changed. Either an idea is the most rational or it’s wrong, and people with the Architect personality type will apply this to their arguments as well as their own behavior, staying calm and detached from these sometimes emotionally charged conflicts. Architects will only be swayed by those who follow suit.

Hard-working and determined – If something piques their interest, Architect personalities can be astonishingly dedicated to their work, putting in long hours and intense effort to see an idea through. Architects are incredibly efficient, and if tasks meet the criteria of furthering a goal, they will find a way to consolidate and accomplish those tasks. However, this drive for efficiency can also lead to a sort of elaborate laziness, wherein Architects find ways to bypass seeming redundancies which don’t seem to require a great deal of thought – this can be risky, as sometimes double-checking one’s work is the standard for a reason.

Open-minded – All this rationalism leads to a very intellectually receptive personality type, as Architects stay open to new ideas, supported by logic, even if (and sometimes especially if) they prove Architects’ previous conceptions wrong. When presented with unfamiliar territory, such as alternate lifestyles, Architects tend to apply their receptiveness and independence, and aversion to rules and traditions, to these new ideas as well, resulting in fairly liberal social senses.

Jacks-of-all-Trades – Architects’ open-mindedness, determination, independence, confidence and strategic abilities create individuals who are capable of doing anything they set their minds to. Excelling at analyzing anything life throws their way, Architects are able to reverse-engineer the underlying methodology of almost any system and apply the concepts that are exposed wherever needed. Architects tend to have their pick of professions, from IT system designers to political masterminds.

Architect Weaknesses

Arrogant – Architect personalities are perfectly capable of carrying their confidence too far, falsely believing that they’ve resolved all the pertinent issues of a matter and closing themselves off to the opinions of those they believe to be intellectually inferior. Combined with their irreverence for social conventions, Architects can be brutally insensitive in making their opinions of others all too clear.

Judgmental – Architects tend to have complete confidence in their thought process, because rational arguments are almost by definition correct – at least in theory. In practice, emotional considerations and history are hugely influential, and a weak point for people with the Architect personality type is that they brand these factors and those who embrace them as illogical, dismissing them and considering their proponents to be stuck in some baser mode of thought, making it all but impossible to be heard.

Overly analytical – A recurring theme with Architects is their analytical prowess, but this strength can fall painfully short where logic doesn’t rule – such as with human relationships. When their critical minds and sometimes neurotic level of perfectionism (often the case with Turbulent Architects) are applied to other people, all but the steadiest of friends will likely need to make some distance, too often permanently.

Loathe highly structured environments – Blindly following precedents and rules without understanding them is distasteful to Architects, and they disdain even more authority figures who blindly uphold those laws and rules without understanding their intent. Anyone who prefers the status quo for its own sake, or who values stability and safety over self-determination, is likely to clash with Architect personalities. Whether it’s the law of the land or simple social convention, this aversion applies equally, often making life more difficult than it needs to be.

Clueless in romance – This antipathy to rules and tendency to over-analyze and be judgmental, even arrogant, all adds up to a personality type that is often clueless in dating. Having a new relationship last long enough for Architects to apply the full force of their analysis on their potential partner’s thought processes and behaviors can be challenging. Trying harder in the ways that Architects know best can only make things worse, and it’s unfortunately common for them to simply give up the search. Ironically, this is when they’re at their best, and most likely to attract a partner.

Romantic Relationships

“Of all forms of caution, caution in love is perhaps the most fatal to true happiness.”

In romance, people with the Architect personality type approach things the way they do with most situations: they compose a series of calculated actions with a predicted and desirable end goal – a healthy long-term relationship. Rather than falling head over heels in a whirlwind of passion and romance, Architects identify potential partners who meet a certain range of pre-determined criteria, break the dating process down into a series of measurable milestones, then proceed to execute the plan with clinical precision.

In a purely rational world, this is a fool-proof methodology – but in reality, it ignores significant details that Architects are likely to dismiss prematurely, such as human nature. People with the Architect personality type are brilliantly intellectual, developing a world in their heads that is more perfect than reality. People entering this world need to fit this fantasy, and it can be incredibly difficult for Architects to find someone up to the task. Needless to say, finding a compatible partner is the most significant challenge most Architects will face in life.

Politeness Is Artificial Good Humor

Sentiment, tradition, and emotion are Architects’ Achilles Heel. Social standards like chivalry are viewed by Architect personalities as silly, even demeaning. The problem is, these standards have developed as a means of smoothing introductions and developing rapport, of managing expectations, the basis of personal relationships. Architects’ propensity for frank honesty in word and action tends to violate this social contract, making dating especially difficult for them.

The lesson Architects often learn is that the ways of love are hard to describe on a spreadsheet.

As they mature, Architects will come to recognize these factors as relevant, incorporating pace and emotional availability into their plans. But the meantime can be dangerous, especially for more Turbulent Architects – if they are shot down too many times they may come to the conclusion that everyone else is simply too irrational, or simply beneath them intellectually. If cynicism takes hold, Architect personalities may end up falling into the trap of intentionally displaying intellectual arrogance, making solitude their choice rather than happenstance.

Always Remain Cool

The positive side of Architects’ “giving up” is that they are most attractive when they aren’t trying to be attractive, working in a familiar environment where their confidence and intelligence can be seen in action. Allowing others to come to them is often Architects’ best strategy, and if they perceive a potential to the relationship, they will spare no effort in developing and maintaining stability and long-term satisfaction.

As their relationships develop, Architects’ partners will find an imaginative and enthusiastic companion, who will share their world and at the same time grant a huge degree of independence and trust. While people with the Architect personality type may never be fully comfortable expressing their feelings, and may spend more time theorizing about intimacy than engaging in it, they can always be relied upon to think out a mutually beneficial solution to any situation.

Architects seek strong, deep relationships, and trust their knowledge and logic to ensure that their partner is satisfied, both intellectually and physically.

But when it comes to emotional satisfaction, Architects are simply out of their element. Not every partner has the sort of fun Architects do in addressing conflicts and emotional needs as puzzles to be analyzed and solved. Sometimes emotions need to be expressed for their own sake, and putting every outburst under the microscope isn’t always helpful. If this becomes habit, or Architects think it may, these personalities are capable of simply ending the relationship, rather than dragging things out.

Truth and Morality

Architects are bewilderingly deep and intelligent people, bringing stability and insight into their romantic relationships. They prize honest, open communication, and all factors of the relationship are open to discussion and change, but this must be reciprocated. Architects do what they think is right, and sometimes that comes across as cold – it’s important to know that Architects don’t make these decisions lightly. They spend a tremendous amount of time and energy trying to understand why and how things go wrong, especially if they’ve devoted themselves to the relationship, and they certainly hurt deeply when things fall apart.

The challenge is finding partners who share those same values – though Intuitive (N) personality types are uncommon, they may be a must for many Architects, as sharing this trait creates an immediate sense of mutual belonging. Having one or two balancing personality traits, such as Extraversion (E), Feeling (F), or Prospecting (P) can help to keep a relationship dynamic and growth-oriented by keeping Architects involved with other people, in touch with their emotions, and open to alternate potentials.

Friendships

“A friend to all is a friend to none.”

People with the Architect personality type tend to have more success in developing friendships than they do with romantic relationships, but they none-the-less suffer from many of the same setbacks, substituting rational processes for emotional availability. This intellectual distance tends to go both ways, making Architects notoriously difficult to read and get to know, and making Architects not want to bother reading anyone they think isn’t on their level. Overcoming these hurdles is often all but impossible without the sort of instant connection made possible by sharing the Intuitive (N) personality trait.

No Person Will Complain for Want of Time Who Never Loses Any

Architects tend to have set opinions about what works, what doesn’t, what they’re looking for, and what they’re not. These discriminating tastes can come across as arrogant, but Architects would simply argue that it’s a basic filtering mechanism that allows them to direct their attentions where they will do the most good. The fact is that in friendship, people with the Architect personality type are looking for more of an intellectual soul mate than anything else, and those that aren’t prepared for that kind of relationship are simply boring. Architects need to share ideas – a self-feeding circle of gossip about mutual friends is no kind of social life for them.

Architects will keep up with just a few good friends, eschewing larger circles of acquaintances in favor of depth and quality.

Further, having more than just a few friends would compromise Architects’ sense of independence and self-sufficiency – they gladly give up social validation to ensure this freedom. Architects embrace this idea even with those who do fit into their social construct, requiring little attention or maintenance to remain on good terms, and encouraging that same independence in their friends.

When it comes to emotional support, Architect personalities are far from being a bastion of comfort. They actively suppress their own emotions with shields of rationality and logic, and expect their friends to do the same. When emotionally charged situations do come about, Architects may literally have no clue how to handle them appropriately, a glaring contrast from their usual capacity for decisive self-direction and composure.

But Friendship Is Precious

When they are in their comfort zone though, among people they know and respect, Architects have no trouble relaxing and enjoying themselves. Their sarcasm and dark humor are not for the faint of heart, nor for those who struggle to read between the lines, but they make for fantastic story-telling among those who can keep up. This more or less limits their pool of friends to fellow Analysts and Diplomat personality types, as Observant (S) types’ preference for more grounded and straightforward communication often simply leaves both parties frustrated.

It’s not easy to become good friends with Architects. Rather than traditional rules of social conduct or shared routine, Architects have exacting expectations for intellectual prowess, uncompromising honesty and a mutual desire to grow and learn as sovereign individuals. Architects are gifted, bright and development-oriented, and expect and encourage their friends to share this attitude. Anyone falling short of this will be labeled a bore – anyone meeting these expectations will appreciate these personalities of their own accord, forming a powerful and stimulating friendship that will stand the test of time.

Parenthood

“Children must be taught how to think, not what to think.”

Parenting, like so many other person-to-person relationships, is a significant challenge for people with the Architect personality type. Being so heavily invested in rational thought, logic, and analyzing cause and effect, Architects are often unprepared for dealing with someone who hasn’t developed these same abilities who they can’t simply walk away from. Luckily, Architects are uniquely capable of committing to a long-term project, especially one as meaningful as parenthood, with all the intellectual vigor they can muster.

I Hope Our Wisdom Will Grow With Our Power...

First and foremost, Architect parents will likely never be able to deliver the sort of warmth and coddling that stereotypes say they should. Architect personalities are rational, perfectionistic, often insensitive, and certainly not prone to overt displays of physical affection – it will take a clear and conscious effort on their part to curb and adapt these qualities to their children’s needs, especially in the younger years. If they have an especially sensitive child, Architects risk inadvertently trampling those sensitivities or coming across as cold and uncaring.

Even less sensitive children will need emotional support from time to time, especially as they approach adolescence – Architects, even more so than other Analyst types, struggle to manage their own emotions in a healthy way, let alone others’. As a result, Architects tend to avoid “unproductive” emotional support, instead taking a solutions-based approach to resolving issues. This is where Architect personalities are strongest – assessing a dilemma to find the underlying cause and developing a plan to solve the problem at its source.

Architect parents don’t just tell their children what to do, though – they prompt them, make them use their own minds so they arrive at the same conclusions, or better ones still.

Architects also recognize that life is often the best teacher, and they will tend to be fairly liberal, allowing their children to have their own adventures and make their own decisions, further developing these critical thinking skills. This isn’t to say that Architects parents are lenient – far from it – rather, they expect their children to use their freedom responsibly, and often enough the weight of this expectation alone is enough to lay out understood ground rules.

When they need to though, Architect parents will communicate openly and honestly with their children, believing that knowing the truth is better than not knowing, or worse yet, simply being wrong.

...And Teach Us That the Less We Use Our Power, the Greater It Will Be

If their children are receptive to this approach, Architect parents will find themselves respected and trusted. Architect personalities are excellent communicators when they want to be, and will frame problems as opportunities for personal growth, helping their children to establish their own brand of rational thinking and independent problem-solving skills to be applied to more and more complex situations as they grow, building their confidence as they make their own way. Architects’ ultimate goal as a parent is to ensure that their children are prepared to deal with whatever life throws their way.

All this is the exertion of Architects’ core philosophy of intelligent self-direction, and in this way these personalities try to mold their children in their own image, working to create capable adults who can go on to use their own minds, solve their own problems, and help their own children in the same way when the time comes. Architects understand that this can’t happen if they shield their children from every source of ill and harm, but believe that if they give their children the right tools, they won’t have to.

There was more but I feel like these cover most of his core elements in a rather interestingly accurate way. 

Tagged by: @doctor-staton

Tagging: @sanguinesorceress , @gravekeeper-anna , @sneakybinch , @bloody-loyalties , and anyone interested!

Link for the test here https://www.16personalities.com/personality-types

[gallasgher]

some thoughts on jl

For of all, I just want to rant about the sexist undertones that pissed me off:

there’s a scene where flash lands all over wonder woman with basically his face in her cleavage and while he immediately gets up, there’s a deliberate pause where you’re supposed to laugh at the ‘awkwardness’? it’s unnecessary and pretty much not funny

in the only scene mera has, arthur and her have an argument. there is no context at all, so it really doesn’t make much sense, but at one point arthur says something really out of place and mera asks him to basically show her some respect, to which he responds with something even more rude (i don’t remember precisely but it made me cringe a lot) and then even worse, later one when he has the lasso around him, arthur admits how incredibly gorgeous he thinks diana is. um he is a married man? arthur just felt uncharacteristically disrespectful towards mera 

there are way too many shots of diana’s ass, perhaps some unintentionally but still, and during one scene, diana is seen wearing this huge cleavage, which is fine, or would have been if they hadn’t purposely squeezed her boobs out as much as they could to make they look big

finally, superman. the suit and tie he is seen wearing in the coffin and in the kryptonian water thing, magically disappears when he breaks through the roof? so then we’re left with loooong shots of his half naked body, as he fights the team. and then even when he brings lois to the farm, he’s still shirtless and her hand is on his abs and she goes ‘you smell good’. that just felt weird to me, idk. 

About the film as a whole, starting with the negatives:

I’m still trying to get over the shock of how different the overall tone, plot, character relationships and overall everything is from mos and bvs... so I might sound harsher than I actually feel towards the movie. But I need to let a few things out so bear with me.

Man of Steel beautifully explored a realistic approach to how men would react to an actual alien. That is, with fear and mistrust. At the end of MoS, Superman is established as a hero who save the world but then in BvS the cost of this man saving the world on his own are discussed and it creates more division, we all know where Batman stands. Basically these two movies fit perfectly together, and the reason the tones are ‘dark and grim’ is because of how realistic they try to be. Superman doesn’t smile much because for all the good he tries to do, most of the world still resents him. The Martha scene is also explained by Bruce’s ptsd. Anyway.

At no point in Justice League did I feel like what was happening was realistic. Instead of normal colors, everything is shiny and too bright, Superman’s suit looks fake compared to the previous movies, especially in the final battle. While you would expect Superman to feel traumatized by literally having died, he simply has a small angry fit for about five minutes, then it’s gone and he’s out there smiling (even though he sacrificed himself to save everyone and yet the world is still ending) and cracking jokes about his own death. Even Batman makes jokes? Way too many?

I expected Lois Lane, who was there when Bruce was about to kill her boyfriend, to be really angry with Bruce, but instead, she encourages Clark to fight with the team, even though it’s only been a few hours since he’s been back, and even though she should be even more scared about the risks of Clark dying than she was in bvs.

The jokes were mostly funny and appreciated but some fell flat and were just inserted to fill in the gaps. I used to praise dc movies for not making marvel’s mistake of having the characters joking around during battle because it takes all the danger of the situation away, and now I guess that’s over because that’s what happened during the entire final battle.

Now, Bruce and Diana. I was already not a fan of the idea of the only woman on the team just having to have romantic chemistry with one of the men. It’s just cliché and predictable. Their mini fight moment felt weird to me, Diana illogically pokes at Bruce’s guilt about Clark’s death (ike yes obviously he feels guilty?), and Bruce childishly brings up Steve Trevor. Not cool. Then again, some people argue it was a technique to get Diana to agree to his plan or whatever so I might be misinterpreting it. 

The final battle scene just seemed very anticlimactic to me, there are too many slow motions that fragment the fast pace of the action, and the close ups of Henry making faces are just... bad. 

I realize I’m making it look like I hated the movie, but it’s far from that. I laughed a lot, and it was incredible seeing all these characters finally brought to the big screen together. I do wished Barry and Bruce’s relationship could have been more developed because they have much in common in terms of parents absence and love of science. But obviously that required longer running time. I absolutely loved Cyborg’s character, he was definitely the best part of the movie for me. From the trailers, it seemed like he would have the least important part out of all the members, but actually his character was really well developed. He was basically the only one that successfully stayed serious while making a few jokes. I really enjoyed the first battle scene the league has without superman, it was basically the only time their powers were all used effectively. Barry was also really in character, aside from a few jokes that could have been avoided, and the very very last scene with Lex and Deathstroke was probably my favorite thing about the movie, it really tied the movie well to the previous movies.

Conclusion: I was disappointed but still enjoyed it, I preferred BvS much more, and I wish Zack had directed it all on his own. I’m just waiting for a director’s cut.

[pkgam]

Oh look at that, we’re going back to the past, lol! This is like a 4-for-1 topic here.

That Movies cause violence.

That Video Games cause violence.

Taxation as a deterrent for mature stuff.

The ol’ gun control debate.

The first two were brought up at the same time and they are similar: The belief that watching something fictional that is violent will cause you to be violent. :P I know I talked about this before, but since it’s brought up again in a more recent time period with some different aspects, I might as well reiterate with some new counter points. I can attest that I have played some of the most over the top video games in history, even as a kid/teen, and I am the biggest pacifists you’ll probably ever meet, lol! Conker’s Bad Fur Day was one of them when I grew up. It came out in 2001 and I was 12, but I still was allowed to get and play it. My family knew that I understood fantasy from reality. The same with any other game really. Though the argument is that some are more influenced by it. You know, like if someone has a mental health issue. But I don’t know why violent video games and movies always get the blame. Maybe they find they are easier targets since rap and rock music has since been understood and accepted and the “dangers” of video games and movies are still being debated.

So what about taxing the games and movies? “Supposedly” they would allocate the money to mental health in schools. But if you know anything about taxes and government programs involving gathering more money, you know that what they say money is going into isn’t usually what is happening. XD Money tends to get “moved", so to speak. See, there was always a program for mental health in schools, so what would happen is that they would use the tax money for said mental health like they said, but move the money that was already in said programs to something else. They do it with stuff like the lottery too. What they said when they made the lottery is that lottery profits goes into schools, so you’d think that the schools would be funded more than what they had before. Nope, their original money got moved to other things. So they often disguise a supposed benefit to something so people go for it so they can move funds around to something else they want. Bills being “called” one thing rarely have any relation to what’s actually “in” them. There could be a bill that is called the “national paper cleanup project” marketed as litter cleaning but it’s actual intent may be to move funds to the environmental-destroying oil industry. Politics in the U.S. 101.

Next is of course when a shooting happens, gun control is brought up. Obviously people with violent tendencies and/or have mental health issues that may cause them to be violent should not be able to get their hands on any gun. But I have to wonder what could be done to stop it. You can close the loopholes like gun show sales without licenses or whatnot, but it’s not like someone couldn’t acquire a gun by some other means. Theft, making it themselves, the black market... So many options for them. People cite Australia as being a good example of gun control, but shootings were already at a downward trend before they even took the guns from people, plus the U.S. has something Australia doesn’t on guns: The right to bear arms. Right in the constitution. People then argue that the guns they had when that was written was like... a musket that took 5 minutes to reload and that gun tech has far advanced. Which no one could argue that gun firing rates vastly improved. But trying to eliminate that from the constitution in a society that is very gun-loving could potentially start a civil war which would cause a LOT more deaths. There’s also the whole “AR-15/assault rifle ban” thing which is strange because knives actually are used to kill more people than rifles. XD Plus the term “assault rifle” is basically a made-up political term to try and put guns into a category that have no sporting purpose, even if they are used in stuff like the Olympics for sport shooting. The same with “semi-automatic” as that’s a term used for anything that reloads itself with cartridges. So... even pistols could be classified as that. :P

Oh... but it gets better! The White House actually released a video of all sorts of video game violence in a compilation of sorts. XD Yes, the ACTUAL White House Youtube channel. You can watch the embed using the link near the bottom of the article, but it of course contains fantasy graphic violence and all that, so you can choose whether or not to do so.

If you watch that, you can see that there is a lot of missing context to things, lol! At 0:37 for instance the game itself will tell you before playing it that you can skip the mission if you want (like I said about the video above.) as they warn it may be "disturbing or offensive". If you do play it however, the character you are will be a part of a Russian group to frame Americans. But for that part the player doesn't have to be made to do a single thing. That was the idea by the developers: To get the player to hesitate "because" it was such a bad scenario to be in. It worked too as it got many such reactions. There’s also another thing about the video: A lot of it wasn’t really gun violence. The very first clip was even a guy being interrogated, an interrogator flipping out and then bludgeoning the interrogated. Needless to say the video got downvoted and debunked to oblivion, then The White House set the video to unlisted. :P Why they didn’t outright delete it I don’t know, though maybe they don’t know how to use Youtube. Technology obviously doesn’t seem to be their top subject, lol!

But ok, so they show a bunch of violence in games as a supposed example of it influencing others to be violent. How true is it? Well, this has been debated for quite a long time. In fact, games like the original Mortal Combat and Doom were basically the reason the ESRB was formed. Someone figured it would be a good idea to categorize games based on violence, sex, language, etc... and age-separate them as recommendations to parents and whatnot. Incredibly Trump had no idea the ESRB even existed as he said games and movies should have a rating system. Though on another hand, He also said that violent games are ok for his son, but not for other’s. o_o There’s obviously a tremendous amount of conflicts just in those two sentences, lol! Let’s see... since he doesn’t think movies have a rating system, how do the workers know not let kids into movies with sex/nudity without parental supervision? How does he know if a game is violent without looking at the rating? Online reviews or playing it himself? How is it that he understands his kid is ok with violent games but would still want to restrict them for other kids? It’s like he doesn’t think parents are parenting, lol! That may be the case with some... but you’ve really gotta wonder how many shooters actually are gamers.

Turns out 80% of shooters had no interest in video games. XD Numerous studies through the years on whether or not violent video games cause violence have come to the same conclusion: There is no correlation between the two. What IS a common thing with mass shooters though is that they tend to have some sort of mental health issue, (That is probably why/how they came up with the “allocate funds to mental health in schools” thing.) which makes the most sense because even the angriest of people know not to resort to violence:

XD

So since this has been debunked over and over for many years now, all of this begs the question: Why is it that politicians keep targeting video games? Well... it’s quite possible that they are using it as a scapegoat. Trump for instance has been speculated to have been bribed by the National Rifle Association’s lobbying so he instead focused his attention elsewhere however illogical as it is. Not that I think that an age restriction would do anything considering the aforementioned black market, gun shows, theft, etc.., but lobbying does have a very strong influence here even if it’s not supposed to. Some even call it an Oligarchy. I don’t think it’s gotten “that” bad here yet, but no doubt money has a very strong influence on politicians. The game industry even fights back with it’s own lobbying. So money leads to stuff, just like throughout history. :P Not’ saying that is the case here, but that is a part of the speculation and may be a possibility.

Speaking of history... Violence was around FAR before video games even existed. Video games, movies, TV shows, etc... are merely made in response to something that already happened by depicting it as itself or as a fantasy scenario. Call Of Duty is often set in World War 2, but World War 2 and all it’s atrocities came LONG before the CoD games set in that time period. So to try and remove instances of violence from media is like to try and forget any kind of violence ever happened to begin with. I am not sure that removing instances of violence would really help to prevent violence in all honesty as it may actually increase it. As the saying by George Santayana goes: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”. Basically it’s a way of saying to learn from the past’s mistakes. So how about focusing on some education in their public speeches and/or meetings rather than “ban this or that”? They don’t omit World War 2 from real History books, so why omit it from fantasy video games? Seems backwards.

Your thoughts? Thanks for reading and have a good one!

[punk-in-docs]

The Rose & the Nightingale, Chapter 1

Benedict Cumberbatch x Female OC, AU. Set in the 1920's, This tells a story of love, jealousy, friendship and desires. Set in the backdrop of 20's Britain, as the ages begin to shift, and Friends realise their lifelong preference for one another could turn out to be the beginning of a simmering romance... (eventual smut) - also on AO3 Chapter number: Chapter 1 Author: punk-in-docs (Here is my Masterlist for more chapters… Don’t laugh at me cause it’ s so, ridiculously tiny) but do take a look if you feel so inclined… Triggers/warnings: Meet cute, no warnings.

They had met, on a heavy and disappointing night, at a debutante party in a crowded London Townhouse in the chilling winter of 1918.

Britain was not all that far from just having won a world war with Germany, and subsequently everyone delighted in their social calendars livening up again, like a busy forest after its inhabitants had hibernated all winter. Out came the silken dresses that had been stowed away in musty trunks during the conflict, once again parties and drinks and dressing up became the norm, and the new age of technology gripped every household that dared to embrace it.

Packed to the rafters was the state of the elegant Knightsbridge home of the Kingsley’s. One of London’s leading families of social elite. The reason being for the ball, was that The Kingsley’s daughter, a one Kitty Kingsley, was blossoming into womanhood at the ripe and unsullied age of sixteen, the age in a girl’s life when frivolous parties, and extravagant dresses would start to become a necessity in their life, overtaking the rare presence of responsibility and smart conversation, that was permanently lacking to any young girl nowadays. The expectations for a girl of this naive age were to be seen and absolutely not heard. Something of which, she’d never been comfortable with.

Perhaps that was why Miss Elizabeth Jones rarely dared to dip her toe into the ‘cesspool’ – as she so often called it, much to her mother’s displeasure – of debutante dowager mama’s and stiff upper lipped father’s aswell as their nauseatingly dim children, who were trying in vain to be sensible, alas she certainly had no desire to blend in with the wallpaper, she was making a point of being both heard and seen.

The first over spoken incident of the evening that resulted as a consequence of her desire to be no demure wall -flowered miss, came when she was introduced to one Mr and Mrs Grey, and their 19 year old son, Jeremy Grey. She had done every polite etiquette correctly. Smiling and averting her eyes to the floor for the risk of being a flirt, commenting reservedly on the number of guests, and the delightful décor of the Kingsley’s home. And as the conversation had dried up thereafter, Mr Grey, and Elizabeth’s father, were engaging in a long winded political debate whilst everyone else smiled and remained in mute, but socially polite, silence.

Elizabeth took the time to scuff the sole of her shoe quietly onto the Victorian black and white tiled floor. Wishing she could be where she wanted at home with her sketchbook, and anywhere on god’s green earth than in this ballroom, with its suffocating atmosphere, in a dress she had yet to grow into and shoes that had been stuffed with tissue paper to help her fit them better. Instead she had to ‘guard her tongue’ as per her mother’s suggestion as she listened to the two men discuss the treaty of Versailles in regards to the treaty of Brest-Litovsk. She bit the inside of her cheek as she struggled not to be heard.

“I fail to see why we’re not demanding more from Germany. All the reparations we have to make to our economy and our businesses, we should bleed their economy dry for what they’ve done to us!” spouted Mr Grey, angrily raising his voice to a passionate degree.

“Because clearly over 20 billion gold marks isn’t enough.” She murmered quietly, sarcastically.

“Elizabeth!” Her mother scalded quickly, an embarrassed blush decorating her cheeks as she berated her daughter using her preferred name to usher her into silence and decorum.

Mr Grey looked at the young girl in a strange manner, gaping at her in wonderment, as were Mrs Grey and Jeremy.

“I beg your pardon, Miss Jones?�� Mr Grey stammered, taken aback that the young girl was corralling him over matters of politics.

“Over $5 million has been demanded from Germany to pay reparations, in gold, commodities, ships and other forms. Surely that will go towards the majority of Occupation costs to the Allies in Europe. And as for the reparations to be made to England, surely France, and Belgium, both of whom have been half obliterated by this conflict must take some precedence and priority in restoring their lands and economy.” Libby argued, seeing Mr Greys face grow more and more shocked by her words. And her out of place attitude that made her sound like she was defending Germany.

Mr Grey narrowed his eyes at the young girl. Mrs Grey and her son looked horrified. Libby’s mother looked about ready to faint from mortification. And her own father actually looked to be quite proud and pleased with her.

“Are you saying you’re sympathising with Germany?” he asked dangerously.

“Not at all Mr Grey. I’m simply stating my opinion that a payment of over 20 billion in gold marks from a war torn state would be not only incredible, but also inconceivable in the face of a country that is facing an annex of its military and just about every other commodity it possesses, down to the raw iron in the ground, and the coal in its mines. Not to mention that the harsh demand can only be adding insult to injury to Germanys History and sooner or later someone is bound to rally the countries broken spirits, and kick up a fuss only made greater by the fact they are a rising industrial leader of this century and are successively being, as you put it… ‘Bled dry’ “

She finished, seeing Mr Greys hand grow slack on his glass, threatening to spill it over the floor and all over his shoes.

Suddenly in a wave of self-consciousness and the sheer unassuming ability of knowing she had just been incredibly rude and condescending, and not to mention severely outspoken. A temperament her mother told her was ugly, frank and impossibly brutish. And not only did she look like she sympathised with an enemy country, she also looked like a loud mouthed know it all. And suddenly, she felt utterly foolish, and very much wished she had just made a lame comment about the weather, and blended nicely in with the baroque wallpaper.

“Excuse me. I think I need to go and fetch myself a drink.” She spoke with the quiet and shy demeanour of a tame dormouse.

She slipped away, through crowds of black satin and formal evening dress with guffawing laughter erupting all around her in the room. She felt defeated, humiliated and just a tiny bit angry. Feeling shamed for having an opinion, was as illogical to her as being ashamed for having arms and legs and a pair of eyes.

Her escapade from the dreadful conversation, however, did not go unnoticed. Perhaps it was the bright colour of her midnight blue velvet dress as she streaked through the crowd that caught his attention amongst the sea of black dresses and suits, black was deemed a safe and quickly popular, modern, colour now, rather than an indication of old fashioned Victorian mourning. Perhaps maybe it was the way he had been stood within earshot of her when she had spouted all her intelligent and upstanding argument about reparations from Germany. And perhaps it was the way he had to try and hide his smile on hearing her passionately degrade a senior in her years with just a few lashes of her educated and eloquently remarkable tongue. But whatever sight or sound it was, that made Elizabeth Jones capture the attention of Benedict Cumberbatch, he knew he liked and thoroughly enjoyed it.

She was tall for her age. And slender too, with that delicate and pale British skin that every prim young miss ought have. Her hair was a short and wild curly array of off red, chestnut hues, impossible to decide between the shocking sight of red or brunette. Given her vibrant and resilient nature, he rather favoured to lean towards red as a common denominator for her hair colouring. Her dress hung off her in an ill-fitting manner, and her noted with nothing but primal curiosity in a way that only a 17 year old male could, was that while she was slender and willow like in height, he could go some way as to say that her bust was of an agreeable size, a size not deemed fashionable in today’s society, and her hips and rear filled out the back of her dress rather well, aswell as showing a Dias cut out on her back where the material fell away, he quite thought he liked the sight of her bare back and the splay of her refined neck. As she turned to weave her way past Mr Ramsgate, he saw that as she turned so lightly in his direction, the soft details of her face was just as pleasurable for him, as the rest of her. Her lips were plump and looked as if they offered and promised soft warmness, in her kiss and in her smile. her nose was, petite and button like, arched softly at just the right size, between two almond shaped dazzling blue eyes, that were also deemed rare and unfashionable, like the fiery flame shade of her hair, that looked big and sensuous when bordered by a fan of impossibly long eyelashes that spilled onto her slightly reddened cheeks as she looked down, steering her feet under her too long dress. She looked up again, walking towards the door, and he could see that her eyebrows were softly bowed on her forehead, arched like angels wings. Altogether, from the look of her, and from the sight of her, the more he saw, the more he was intrigued to know.

The final ‘Perhaps’ that raced through Benedict’s mind when he was looking at this elegant, beautiful and vibrant girl, was the perhaps that maybe she was different to the other blushing empty headed debutante girls who he had been dragged here, and forced by his parents, to meet and eventually wed. This girl was highly unfashionable judging by her looks, short auburn hair and blue eyes, not long brown or blonde hair and brown eyes that were favoured exotic and currently ‘all the rage’, and by her manner, berating a middle aged man over his crass opinion in politics and foreign affairs, and this. This is what made him want to go and introduce himself to her.

He excused himself politely from talking to Felicity Warrington, who had just commented on the lavish décor of the Kingsley’s home. He rather inclined to favour that the word ‘lavish’ was the only eloquent word in her vocabulary, and walked quietly and fairly quickly through the house to try and find theflame headed pariah who had distanced herself from the party.

Eventually, he came to a quiet, unlit corridor near the front of the house close to the cloakroom. And there she sat on the windowsill that overlooked the moonlit bathed front garden that faced the quieting street.

She had tugged off her shoes and left them in disarray on the floor, and her legs were pulled up and crossed in front of her, her bare feet rested on the deep window ledge. And her forehead was touching her knees, making her vivaciously coloured curls spill over her knees, and shroud her face from view. Her hair this way, however, revealed her ears and the small sapphire earbobs that were pinned into them. Her arms were linked around her legs, resting just below her kneecaps, and her saw that the moonlight that was streaming in from the window, was touching her skin so freely, and illuminating it in a manner akin to goddesses in pre Raphaelite paintings, that he suddenly envied the slice of light to be able to caress her skin at liberty without question or permission.

He suddenly felt he had to say something and stop invading her privacy in a strictly unforgivably rude manner.

“Pardon me, but. Are you, all right?”

She startled at the timbre of his soft baritone voice breeching her silence and solitude. Her head whipping up to bestow upon her intruder a surprised gaze, with her full lips parting and her blue eyes blinking in adjustment to the tall boy stood near the shadows of the doorway, peering at her worriedly.

She was struck by how old-worldly he looked. His face was thin and long, but not unpleasantly so. In fact, she thought to herself quietly with apposition, handsomely so. His was an unforgettably striking face, which she could tell, in an – unbeknownst famously to her - sense of prediction, that was destined to grow even more strikingly handsome as he got older. He had dark hair resting between black or brown, she couldn’t tell in the unforgiving shadow of the doorway where he stood. But he had softly placed feline shaped eyes that were awash in Mediterranean blue irises, residing under fairly curved eyebrows. She had never seen the Mediterranean Sea, only had she read about it in books, likening its soft, salty blue depths to the colour and warmth of his eyes. She has also learnt from books that this particular ocean was the temperature of a boiling hot bath after it had been left half an hour, resulting in a lazy warmth that instantly recalled her to think of the hsade this strangers eyes. His nose was, as far as noses go, button like and well suited to his face, she wasn’t sure if ‘button nose’ really constituted itself as a compliment, but, on having had to talk to Lawrence Finch for some portion of the evening, a boy whose nose had yet to grow into his face, and probably proceeded his body several seconds before he physically entered the room, again, when comparing that unfortunate trait to this boys nose, she decided that ‘button like’ was indeed a soft and graceful compliment. But the thing that drew her attention most was the fact that the shadows carved away his face in stark contrast, so that sharp cheekbones dominated his well-structured jaw. Nearly going all the way to say the darkness that cut away his features framed the cut out of the hillside shape of his cupids bow lips that were both feminine and masculine all in one.

She decided that it would be polite to speak as she had spent far too many seconds evaluating his appearance in her head. Seeing his brows twitch upwards in an awaiting gesture, as he pulled out of the shadows of the doorway, so she could see he was lean, tall and well built.

“I, must learn to watch my tongue better. I fear my, outbursts and prejudiced comments land me in veritable swamps of trouble more often than not.”

She commented, her toes curling on the window ledge in embarrassment. As he came to rest in front of the wall opposite her, hands in his pockets as he inspected his shoes in a shy burst of insecurity. She saw how the moon that was beaming in from behind her was plastering his figure to the wall, bathing him in godly illusion. He liked that her voice was adamant, pleasant sounding and resolute. Like the soft song of a nightingale.

“Well. Without meaning to appear in favour with popular opinion, I think you should in actual fact guard your tongue less, only. It’s far more amusing that way.” She raised her brows in disbelief.

“Are you arguing with me?” She ascertained lightly. He smiled shyly.

“I wouldn’t dare to, or dream of, saying yes. Wanting not to sound like a pansy here, I think we can safely agree it is an argument you’d win.” He smiled, his smirk shining through twinkling moonlit eyes.

And they examined each other for a moment, watching how the moonlight could simply strip away all their inhibitions, and leave them bare and unguarded to one another in an age that was so wantonly cloaked and kept under strict lock and key. He liked how he was stood directly opposite her now, and the light was framing every inch of her from this newfound angle, making her hair look like red strands of silk, and warranting her skin to look ethereal and enchanting, along with the brutality and vibrancy of her eyes and the shade of her dress, that blended beautifully with the night washed sky behind her out of that window. She is a magical, exotic, ethereal wood nymph hailing straight  from the pages of Greek mythology. She could write sonnets about the magical way in which the light transformed him into a man rather than a boy.

She laughed lightly at his comment, before remembering what age of etiquette she lived in.

“Elizabeth Jones. It’s a pleasure to meet you.” She stood, and offered her hand.

“Benedict Cumberbatch. It is a pleasure, Elizabeth.” He spoke easily taking her hand and smiling all the more. He then gestured to the spacious room by her side on the window seat. She was a delightful creature. He liked the feel, the taste, of her name on his tongue.

“I beg your pardon, and the sordid intrusion of your solitude, but, may I join you?” he asked, placing a hand to imitate where he wished to sit.

She smiled. “But of course, but, on one upstanding and not to be contended point, Benedict…” she started.

“That point being?” he enquired before he sat. Still stood adjacent to her, and thoroughly enjoying the sight of her.

“You call me Libby. Elizabeth is the name I get called by my parent’s when I forget to bite my tongue.”

He smiled widely.

“But of course, and, can I press a request of my own, Libby?”

“I am so agreeable as to let you offer an appeal of your own, so yes?” She asked, interested.

“Please call me Ben. Benedict does rather make me sound like a breakfast dish.”

They both laughed in time with each other, and that was the incredibly easy start of their firm friendship… The sensible debutante, and the kind, eligible boy. and what a fine pair they made.

~ Chapter 2 ~

@frenchfrostpudding @heavymist @echantedbytwh @totallynotasmutblog @wolfsmom1 @damageditem any fans in? tell me to sod off tagging you if you don't like it :) x

[rokachan]

Personality Quiz

YOUR PERSONALITY TYPE IS:

ARCHITECT PERSONALITY (INTJ, -A/-T)

It’s lonely at the top, and being one of the rarest and most strategically capable personality types, Architects know this all too well. Architects form just two percent of the population, and women of this personality type are especially rare, forming just 0.8% of the population – it is often a challenge for them to find like-minded individuals who are able to keep up with their relentless intellectualism and chess-like maneuvering. People with the Architect personality type are imaginative yet decisive, ambitious yet private, amazingly curious, but they do not squander their energy.

Quiz is HERE!

Tagged by: @zephyrusmontenbelt

Tagging: @kulain @felidae-malcontent @not-that-navi @the-false-ser-toes @ranirus @disheldinwell @adellennehocoleux @bexyamalaryssia

Strengths:

Quick, Imaginative and Strategic Mind – Architects pride themselves on their minds, taking every opportunity to improve their knowledge, and this shows in the strength and flexibility of their strategic thinking. Insatiably curious and always up for an intellectual challenge, Architects can see things from many perspectives. Architects use their creativity and imagination not so much for artistry, but for planning contingencies and courses of action for all possible scenarios.

High Self-Confidence – Architects trust their rationalism above all else, so when they come to a conclusion, they have no reason to doubt their findings. This creates an honest, direct style of communication that isn’t held back by perceived social roles or expectations. When Architects are right, they’re right, and no amount of politicking or hand-holding is going to change that fact – whether it’s correcting a person, a process, or themselves, they’d have it no other way.

Independent and Decisive – This creativity, logic and confidence come together to form individuals who stand on their own and take responsibility for their own actions. Authority figures do not impress Architects, nor do social conventions or tradition, and no matter how popular something is, if they have a better idea, Architects will stand against anyone they have to in a bid to have it changed. Either an idea is the most rational or it’s wrong, and Architects will apply this to their arguments as well as their own behavior, staying calm and detached from these sometimes emotionally charged conflicts. Architects will only be swayed by those who follow suit.

Hard-working and determined – If something piques their interest, Architects can be astonishingly dedicated to their work, putting in long hours and intense effort to see an idea through. Architects are incredibly efficient, and if tasks meet the criteria of furthering a goal, they will find a way to consolidate and accomplish those tasks. However, this drive for efficiency can also lead to a sort of elaborate laziness, wherein Architects find ways to bypass seeming redundancies which don’t seem to require a great deal of thought – this can be risky, as sometimes double-checking one’s work is the standard for a reason.

Open-minded – All this rationalism leads to a very intellectually receptive personality type, as Architects stay open to new ideas, supported by logic, even if (and sometimes especially if) they prove Architects’ previous conceptions wrong. When presented with unfamiliar territory, such as alternate lifestyles, Architects tend to apply their receptiveness and independence, and aversion to rules and traditions, to these new ideas as well, resulting in fairly liberal social senses.

Jacks-of-all-Trades – Architects’ open-mindedness, determination, independence, confidence and strategic abilities create individuals who are capable of doing anything they set their minds to. Excelling at analyzing anything life throws their way, Architects are able to reverse-engineer the underlying methodology of almost any system and apply the concepts that are exposed wherever needed. Architects tend to have their pick of professions, from IT system designers to political masterminds.

Weaknesses:

Arrogant – Architects are perfectly capable of carrying their confidence too far, falsely believing that they’ve resolved all the pertinent issues of a matter and closing themselves off to the opinions of those they believe to be intellectually inferior. Combined with their irreverence for social conventions, Architects can be brutally insensitive in making their opinions of others all too clear.

Judgmental – Architects tend to have complete confidence in their thought process, because rational arguments are almost by definition correct – at least in theory. In practice, emotional considerations and history are hugely influential, and a weak point for Architects is that they brand these factors and those who embrace them as illogical, dismissing them and considering their proponents to be stuck in some baser mode of thought, making it all but impossible to be heard.

Overly analytical – A recurring theme with Architects is their analytical prowess, but this strength can fall painfully short where logic doesn’t rule – such as with human relationships. When their critical minds and sometimes neurotic level of perfectionism (often the case with Turbulent Architects) are applied to other people, all but the steadiest of friends will likely need to make some distance, too often permanently.

Loathe highly structured environments – Blindly following precedents and rules without understanding them is distasteful to Architects, and they disdain even more authority figures who blindly uphold those laws and rules without understanding their intent. Anyone who prefers the status quo for its own sake, or who values stability and safety over self-determination, is likely to clash with Architect personality types. Whether it’s the law of the land or simple social convention, this aversion applies equally, often making life more difficult than it needs to be.

Clueless in romance – This antipathy to rules and tendency to over-analyze and be judgmental, even arrogant, all adds up to a personality type that is often clueless in dating. Having a new relationship last long enough for Architects to apply the full force of their analysis on their potential partner’s thought processes and behaviors can be challenging. Trying harder in the ways that Architects know best can only make things worse, and it’s unfortunately common for them to simply give up the search. Ironically, this is when they’re at their best, and most likely to attract a partner.

[kilieit]

I recognise that the council has made a decision; but given that it’s a stupid-ass decision, I’ve elected to ignore it.

16 Personality Test - “THE ARCHITECT” (INTJ-T)

It’s lonely at the top, and being one of the rarest and most strategically capable personality types, Architects know this all too well – it is often a challenge for them to find like-minded individuals who are able to keep up with their relentless intellectualism and chess-like manoeuvring. People with the Architect personality type are imaginative yet decisive, ambitious yet private, amazingly curious, but they do not squander their energy.

STRENGTHS:

Quick, Imaginative and Strategic Mind – Architects pride themselves on their minds, taking every opportunity to improve their knowledge, and this shows in the strength and flexibility of their strategic thinking. Insatiably curious and always up for an intellectual challenge, Architects can see things from many perspectives. Architects use their creativity and imagination not so much for artistry, but for planning contingencies and courses of action for all possible scenarios.

High Self-Confidence – Architects trust their rationalism above all else, so when they come to a conclusion, they have no reason to doubt their findings. This creates an honest, direct style of communication that isn’t held back by perceived social roles or expectations. When Architects are right, they’re right, and no amount of politicking or hand-holding is going to change that fact – whether it’s correcting a person, a process, or themselves, they’d have it no other way.

Independent and Decisive – This creativity, logic and confidence come together to form individuals who stand on their own and take responsibility for their own actions. Authority figures do not impress Architects, nor do social conventions or tradition, and no matter how popular something is, if they have a better idea, Architects will stand against anyone they have to in a bid to have it changed. Either an idea is the most rational or it’s wrong, and Architects will apply this to their arguments as well as their own behaviour, staying calm and detached from these sometimes emotionally charged conflicts. Architects will only be swayed by those who follow suit.

Hard-working and determined – If something piques their interest, Architects can be astonishingly dedicated to their work, putting in long hours and intense effort to see an idea through. Architects are incredibly efficient, and if tasks meet the criteria of furthering a goal, they will find a way to consolidate and accomplish those tasks. However, this drive for efficiency can also lead to a sort of elaborate laziness, wherein Architects find ways to bypass seeming redundancies which don’t seem to require a great deal of thought – this can be risky, as sometimes double-checking one’s work is the standard for a reason.

Open-minded – All this rationalism leads to a very intellectually receptive personality type, as Architects stay open to new ideas, supported by logic, even if (and sometimes especially if) they prove Architects’ previous conceptions wrong. When presented with unfamiliar territory, such as alternate lifestyles, Architects tend to apply their receptiveness and independence, and aversion to rules and traditions, to these new ideas as well, resulting in fairly liberal social senses.

Jacks-of-all-Trades – Architects’ open-mindedness, determination, independence, confidence and strategic abilities create individuals who are capable of doing anything they set their minds to. Excelling at analysing anything life throws their way, Architects are able to reverse-engineer the underlying methodology of almost any system and apply the concepts that are exposed wherever needed. Architects tend to have their pick of professions, from IT system designers to political masterminds.

WEAKNESSES

Arrogant – Architects are perfectly capable of carrying their confidence too far, falsely believing that they’ve resolved all the pertinent issues of a matter and closing themselves off to the opinions of those they believe to be intellectually inferior. Combined with their irreverence for social conventions, Architects can be brutally insensitive in making their opinions of others all too clear.

Judgemental – Architects tend to have complete confidence in their thought process, because rational arguments are almost by definition correct – at least in theory. In practice, emotional considerations and history are hugely influential, and a weak point for Architects is that they brand these factors and those who embrace them as illogical, dismissing them and considering their proponents to be stuck in some baser mode of thought, making it all but impossible to be heard.

Overly analytical – A recurring theme with Architects is their analytical prowess, but this strength can fall painfully short where logic doesn’t rule – such as with human relationships. When their critical minds and sometimes neurotic level of perfectionism (often the case with Turbulent Architects) are applied to other people, all but the steadiest of friends will likely need to make some distance, too often permanently.

Loathe highly structured environments – Blindly following precedents and rules without understanding them is distasteful to Architects, and they disdain even more authority figures who blindly uphold those laws and rules without understanding their intent. Anyone who prefers the status quo for its own sake, or who values stability and safety over self-determination, is likely to clash with Architect personality types. Whether it’s the law of the land or simple social convention, this aversion applies equally, often making life more difficult than it needs to be.

Clueless in romance – This antipathy to rules and tendency to over-analyse and be judgemental, even arrogant, all adds up to a personality type that is often clueless in dating. Having a new relationship last long enough for Architects to apply the full force of their analysis on their potential partner’s thought processes and behaviours can be challenging. Trying harder in the ways that Architects know best can only make things worse, and it’s unfortunately common for them to simply give up the search. Ironically, this is when they’re at their best, and most likely to attract a partner.

--

Test here

Tagged by @gigantpole

[scrawnydutchman]

How Important Is It to Cast Based on Race in Film & TV?

***DISCLAIMER*** I do not condone, sympathize with or in any way align myself with the immoral act dubbed “whitewashing”. Casting based on racial prejudice or hatred towards anyone is malicious and illogical, and my thoughts and condolences are with anyone of any ethnic origin who suffers from such stigmatization or anything similar to it. I purely believe that casting should be solely about picking whoever is most qualified for the role, be them man, woman, black white, asian, or any identity. If that means casting a Black Lex Luthor or an Asian Captain America, I back it 100%.

I realize that what I’m about to tackle is a very delicate topic in modern times and truthfully, I sympathize with both sides of the argument. But the opinion I’m about to express is not guaranteed to be a satisfactory one for every reader (obviously) so before continuing to read this article I humbly ask that you proceed with an open mind, particularly to art and the artists that create them. Here we go:

Racial casting has been an uprising issue of awareness nowadays, and not without good reason. People are starting to notice more gradually the questionable casting choices that are made in our prominent media, particularly when it comes to white actors or actresses being cast as traditionally Asian or perhaps even African American roles at times. This is a topic people are particularly sensitive about because for one, they often notice a disproportionate statistic of Asian or other persuasion actors not getting as much work as white ones, despite many of them being exceptionally talented. For another, whenever producers or directors are questioned about these casting choices they have an unfortunate tendency to give either unsatisfactory or straight up poor taste answers to the questions, like “white people are inherently more relatable to a larger audience” (which yes, I will agree that argument is complete bullshit). As a result of people wanting more prominent representations of non white races in media, particularly those of Asian descent most commonly Chinese or Japanese, ESPECIALLY in the context of representing those cultures. Works like Kubo and the Two Strings, Dr. Strange and most recently the Netflix series Iron Fist have come under attack from a public demanding more culturally and ethnically appropriate casting of the leads or supporting characters (in spite of the fact that the Iron Fist marvel character has been caucasian since his premiere in the comics). 

Now, this article is going to be for the purposes of tackling this issue from a creative standpoint rather then a social one, because truthfully that is the standpoint most artists tackle such an issue. When it comes to a decision of racial casting based on marketability; I.E. “we should cast a white man because supposedly he’s more relatable to a wider audience” or “we should cast a black man because leads of other ethnic persuasion are more popular these days” that’s more of a producer and marketers line of thinking, because they’re less interested in being sensitive or creative and more about just getting as much butts in the seats as possible. When it comes to the director or creator to some capacity however, when they are in charge of casting they’re primary goal is: does this actor suit the PERSONALITY of the character? Do they suit the strong tone, or the sensitive side, of the hamminess of the dialogue, or the witty banter? Can this actor maintain the illusion of portraying something they aren’t as convincingly as possible? Because that’s what the art of acting is: pretending to be something you’re not.

Now, obviously there’s certain context where racially appropriate casting makes the most sense from a creative standpoint too. If you’re gonna make a revenge flick about a black man in the wild west escaping slavery and shooting out an entire mansion of oppressive slave owners to get his wife back . . . you should PROBABLY cast a black man.

But in the context of Django Unchained his racial identity plays a prominent role in the narrative, which isn’t necessarily the case for every story. In many stories the narrative has little to nothing to do with what race the protagonist is or ANY character in the story for that matter. When race isn’t even acknowledged in the story the attributes of the main character become more about personality traits: is he strong? is he honorable? does he lie sometimes? is he a joking personality? is he quiet and stoic? is he loud and rowdy? This is ESPECIALLY true for animation, because as opposed to live action you don’t even SEE the race of whoever is portraying the characters, therefore the illusion is a lot easier to maintain. Sometimes it becomes SO easy to maintain that as a result the race of the lead voice actor doesn’t even cross the mind of the viewers and the voice and character become synonymous with each other. Here’s an example of my point:

This here is Phil LaMarr. He is a talented voice actor hired multiple times by Cartoon Network, Adult Swim, LucasArts, Nickelodeon and much more. Now just based on what clear ethnicity he is you would assume that he’s always given the role of the black character in any given animation or film right? It’s only natural that a black man’s voice would suit a black character every time.

WRONG!

This man is the voice for Samurai Jack, who throughout the run of the series is clearly portrayed to be of Japanese descent (as you might have guessed)

And this is FAR from the first instance in which a voice actor of one race has portrayed a character with the race of another. Remember Uncle Phil from The Fresh Prince of Bel Air? He was the Shredder in the Ninja Turtles cartoon from the 80s.

Now I know what you’re thinking: “But the issue is how much white people get picked and casted in comparison to other races”. I won’t deny that racial profiling may be a motivator in some cases, but I’d still make the argument that casting in many cases INCLUDING the choice of a white person over another persuasion is purely for the sake of communicating a character before a racial identity.

This voice actor is Steve Blum, who is a very talented man that ranks among my favorite voice actors in the industry and is also the friendliest and most humble sonofagun if you ever meet him in person. He has played MANY iconic characters in cartoons including the Green Goblin in the Spectacular Spider-Man series (one of his most underrated roles IMO), Spike in Cowboy Bebop (one of my favorite tv series of all time), Amon in Legend of Korra, and most notably Wolverine in almost every damn X-Men property you ever heard of that doesn’t involve Hugh Jackman.

He was also Mugen in the titular anime series Samurai Champloo

*the frequent mention of Samurai characters is completely incidental

Now really think about this: a tv series of the literal animation genre from JAPAN, made the conscious decision to cast a white man for a clearly Japanese character for it’s English dub. And I for one think it’s pretty clear why they chose him for the role: it’s because he can easily execute the personality of Mugen with his voice; rugid, ill mannered, highly temperamental, cocky, undisciplined. That’s not to say an Asian man COULDN’T pull it off to the same effectiveness, I’m not saying casting anybody else in this role would have necessarily been a bad choice. What I AM saying is, Steve Blum was a GREAT choice and I don’t think his race, whatever it may be, effects the outcome. You can’t argue with results is what I’m saying.

These men were all casted for their roles for the same reason: They could communicate the character with their voice. And this creative decision making doesn’t even stop at mix matching people of race. It’s a common practice in cartoons to cast Women as little children, including boys. Bart Simpson is a female voice. Debi Derryberry dedicates much of her career to portraying little boys like Zatch Bell and more notably Jimmy Neutron. This is because, once again, they can communicate youth, naivety, impatience, immaturity, and childlike wonder, for either boys OR girls, with their voice. Really, their real life sex has little to nothing to deal with the process. On the flipside, men can often play women too, especially if they’re meant to be characteristically ugly, like Edna Mode from The Incredibles.

My point in bringing this up is, an artists goal is to make their art as convincing and immersing as possible, and in doing so they must carefully select the right people for the job. This does not always mean picking somebody of matching ethnicity, sex or other aspects of identity. And this is because of a very simple yet poignant fact: characters are their personalities BEFORE they are their race or sex. This applies to the casting choices of Kubo and the Two Strings, and while I haven’t yet seen either Dr. Strange or Iron Fist I wouldn’t put it past them to also have the same creative process. Or maybe they are legitimately racist assholes, idk, but I personally believe in giving the benefit of the doubt. And this principle can sometimes extend even farther then animation and into the world of live action.

I don’t think anybodies going to fight me when I say Patrick Stewart is the quintessential live action Professor Charles Xavier. The live action X-men franchise has certainly had its ups and downs, but one thing it almost ALWAYS gets down is casting choices IMO (Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, Patrick Stewart as Professor X, Ian Mckellen as Magneto, Alan Cummings as Nightcrawler, Kelsey Grammar as Beast, more often then not this series hits casting right on the head). Patrick Stewart is great as the professor because he’s sophisticated, he’s a leader, he’s calculated but compassionate, he’s stern but sentimental. He’s naturally bald . . . which isn’t necessarily a must every time, you could easily do that to anyone with makeup, but it helps. There’s just one thing though . . he’s not actually handicapped. What if an actually handicapped person desperately wanted this role? What if he was just as qualified for it if not more? I won’t deny the possibility that that could happen . .  but I also can’t deny that Patrick Stewart was a great choice in SPITE of the fact that he can walk. It’s very clear why he was chosen: he’s just like the Professor X of the comics. He’s classy, he’s professional, he intimidates you but also welcomes you, he speaks with authority in his voice. He earns the respect of his peers. He may be always sitting down but he’s often the tallest figure in the room. And that’s the most important thing: Professor X is a character BEFORE he is a handicapped person.

So what I’m hoping you’ll take from this is whenever you see an article about a supposedly racist or sexist or xenophobic casting choice, you keep an open mind and try to put yourself in the shoes of the artist in question. Why would he decide to do this? Is there any motivation besides racism or sexism? What about this casting choice has potential for the character in question? how talented is the person they chose? I once again do not deny that racial profiling can TOTALLY exist in certain casting choices, but I don’t agree that it’s the key motivator for every casting choice in every situation. Besides, if anything our casting choices are more open minded and inclusive then they EVER were before! Peter Dinklage played Boliver Trask in X-Men: Days of Future Past, who was traditionally a tall person in the comics. Micheal Clarke Duncan played Kingpin in the 2003 Daredevil movie (yes, I’m aware that movie sucked) despite the Kingpin being traditionally white in the comics. More recently then that, there’s the latest Human Torch in that Fantastic Four movie from last year. That’s because they could act, they could be tough, they could be great antagonists. They could get the job done. More important then being the right race, the right sex, the right body type, the right whatever the hell . . . .you have to be the right one for the job.

[malcolmcurtiss4-blog]

United States Terror Story Ultimately Exposes Its Much.

In addition to various plays and also rhymes, the prolific as well as fabulous Victorian writer, Charles Dickens, writtened a total from 15 books, all of which stay equally as cherished in 2012 as they were actually when 1st published in the 19th century. Why it Functions: Like Nabakov's Lolita above, Symbol Twain's questionable storyteller creates much less from a grand finale story spin than a refined remarkable irony. This is actually unexpected that the reader will cherish committing their attend a tale that was an illusion. The tale from John Lefebvre, the guy behind NetTeller, a small Canadian web startup that processed remittances in between gamers and also internet gaming stadiums. I anticipate writing narratives along with spin closings and also some only being for enjoyable. The viewers and also your editor are going to detect the ending coming unless you are actually extremely good at camouflaging the simple fact if you carry out leave hints. Ideal but, this Story Say to, Story Offer strategy help sales, monitoring, consultants, appointment coordinators, solopreneurs or even public servants. Nearly all article writers (including me) are in love with their personal vocals, yet this may obtain quite mundane for the audience. The story carries out not must be complex or lengthy however it performs have to reveal the child what a parent assumes to occur and also what a moms and dad assumes the kid to do. As this story traces an inspection in reverse, readers slowly start to obtain a concept of just what is actually really taking place. What nobody could anticipate is actually that the hero is the killer, is actually the target too! AHS has certainly never ventured in to the found-footage genre just before, therefore this makes for a stylistically engaging twist. AHS has never ventured in to the found-footage genre before, thus this creates a stylistically powerful spin. Like grandpa's stories from Paul Bunyan and Johnny Appleseed, our company like The Embellisher and his sensational tales. The motion picture is actually a captivating one where pair of GI's property coming from WW2 fall for a set of sisters as well as aid them along with their failing Inn in Vermont. The incidents of love that come in the course of this time period as well as identifying Kranthi is actually a major asset. Thus permit us go an action more and also explore the different manner ins which you can craft your ending so regarding stamp an enduring impact on your visitor's mind. There were opportunities that his kids will enter hot arguments with their teachers on how exactly the tale truly goes. In this particular course, we evaluate The Gift of the Magi by Holly using a story design template, which you may make use of to detail your personal twist tales eventually in the training program. He pledges to offer his viewers, the very best that an Indian passion relationship can use. Chetan Bhagat portrays the wonderful story. from his marital relationship to a Tamil Brahmin as well as has actually dedicated '2 States' to his in-laws. If you beloved this short article and you would like to obtain additional facts with regards to yellow pages online australia (simply click the next internet page) kindly check out the website. If a character possesses an unique item that they have been using the whole story, carry out not possess them make use of claimed item in your twist. Although this may be very smart, it ought to help removal the story along as well as contribute the last punchline. The bullshit part of the twist happens when the program draws a bait-and-switch right after the cast has actually put together at our home. Our company can make use of Toto as an example of exactly how personalities manage the plot as well as the variation as well as kips down the account. This type of finishing is actually not every person's excellent ending, but Chopin's ironic as well as unfortunate twist supported the overall unfortunate mood of the account. The plot thickened when a body was found out along with numerous bullet wounds to the head, as well as determined as John Cameron. Definitely, you can formulate a various strategy for each and every night of the week and still take pleasure in a stable of meals including a lot of substances well known in Northern United States lifestyle however with that unique, Mexican twist to guarantee that you'll remember that incredibly more popularly. Composing each fiction as well as book, she ventures to obtain knowledge as well as share that with a special variation from imagination to her visitors. However, this bitter-sweet ending makes this one of the greatest timeless short stories. Consequently this was actually along with a lot trepidation that I mosted likely to watch this paddling new version from the Oliver Twist film as well as the good news is I was not miserable. If you want to combine your affection from record along with your model boat building ability, this's likewise superb. For example instead of the Three Little bit of Porkers" he would inform the tale of the Three Little bit of Sows". There is actually a drip-feed of information about the principal story, a seriously possessing background to some of the primary characters and, without a pointer from hyperbole, probably the greatest spin that Shyamalan has actually implemented since The Second sight. A questionable storyteller bents completion by revealing, often in the end from the narrative, that the storyteller has maneuvered or fabricated the anticipating story, thereby requiring the reader to examine their previous presumptions concerning the message. Guide is quite possibly composed as well as has the audience's interest all through the tale. Accurately, this is specifying factors for the huge disclose in Chapter 6." Ryan Murphy has actually been aggravating a game-changing twist in Episode 6 given that the time started, and also our team are actually reckoning it has one thing to carry out with Jackson's personality. A wonderful instance of the resides in the Wizard of Oz. Toto is Dorothy's pet, he possesses no product lines approve for an occasional bark listed here or even certainly there ... but he has a story from his personal. Twist ensign positions are actually simply unparalleled for their quality, flexibility and resilience. Then, think of a common denominator in between both closings where you can easily make the story line similar, and after that divided the plot off in an unsuspecting direction. Made through heating system glucose, butter and dairy, this velvety delight comes in a variety of typical flavours like clotted cream, vanilla and also chocolate, or even may be given a present-day spin along with brand new, thrilling enhancements. This is another well-known spin that the viewers will likely find coming and also dislike. A plot spin must be actually distinct or even, at the minimum, with the ability of surprising your audiences. Applying that advise in the context of American Horror Account, Murphy should probably check out each text and take out one plot device before filming it. Screw that. Remove five. The book is still split in to 3 primary segments which divide the account baseding upon the duration, personalities and also relational intricacies. In, probably, a clumsy technique from saying it, the ultimate variation needs to not be actually illogically birthed coming from the very early plot, personality traits, as well as inspiration, but neither must that reside in any sort of way telegramed in front of its presentation. Policymakers have actually taken a regular outline as well as presented the film in a battered the formula from death. However, there is something that I must let the visitor know, before I wrap up the tale. The art of a twisted ending resides in misinforming the reader to think something different in comparison to what is heading to be sprung on all of them.

[jaxonowm26878-blog]

The Ten Coolest Cars In Flick Past.

Meanwhile, our experts are actually still guiding and also braking, however our team've progressed later on to self-driving cars and trucks. If you have any issues relating to where and how to use simply click the following webpage, you can make contact with us at the internet site. Grandmother turismo is a prank when it pertains to both regretfully, and NFS simply lets your autos respawn" as well as manages their physics like matchbox autos. You may believe that they are pointless as well as rightly therefore as several of the ones offered beforehand are actually not worth it. The first couple of ones will give you discount rates and also may be actually a rise in performance of several car parameters through simply a few percentage. Incorporate an auto-pilot with a really good vehicle driver, and you receive an autopilot with, if not a negative chauffeur, a minimum of not such a really good one. When we ultimately woke up to the issue of dwi our team secured DUI guideline as well as enforcement and also no one ever before whined that our company wished to disallow cars - since that snappy comeback is not an argument, it's simply an illogical barrier to reasonable discussion. Bethesda is actually always helpful for launching ONE HUNDRED% of the video game and after that yet another 20% in DLC. Wel Falout New Vegas does an excellent task from offering numerous endings with variants from story as you choose in between various (I intend to point out 4) factions for the last match. One option that you absolutely ought to include is actually Mini's tender loving care package deal; that covers all servicing for 5 years or 50,000 kilometers, and also the expense of any sort of substitute parts that are actually had to get your vehicle with a MOST during that duration. That attitude, paint shade apart, is what Halberstam incredibly completely explores within this spot-on analysis of the lamentations from the 'significant three' vehicle producers in the 70s. This publication is actually the nugget of what could possibly have been a far better as well as is actually simply sufficient to earn me upset that it wasn't better. Jake Glazier just possessed the vehicle for about a month, as he offered that rather promptly for approximately $18,000. Talk to the wedding celebration vehicle firm what kind of ribbons they will suggest for the vehicle you have actually opted for as they would have embellished the cars and truck just before. I could look for an address through Google.com Maps on my pc, hop in the cars and truck, attach the USB cord for Android Vehicle and Google Right now gives me an expected time to the area I just looked for. I after that possess a number from regulations that alter the volume for the vehicle to ensure that this reduces gradually if you relinquish the gas button, and also decelerates actually rapidly if the car deals with laterally. However alongside that, you are going to additionally should consider dealer rebates, recurring market values, supplier motivations, and also various other factors in order to get the affordable rate on the vehicle price. The electronics within are actually just as well sensitive to water, and also a lot of all of them are actually therefore expensive to correct that an older automobile is much more practical to simply ditch. Dr Caroline Watt from the College from Edinburgh claims that this is actually the view in the Friday 13th fear that could, as a matter of fact, confirm the best threat to the common individual: If folks believe in the fear of Friday the 13th after that they feel they are in higher danger on that particular day. And bear in mind to consistently ask the car service center whether they partner with your insurance provider. Additionally in the running is Tesla, led by futurist billionaire Elon Musk, a vehicle organization that connects the divide in between Detroit and Silicon Valley by specialising in electric and also autonomous cars and trucks. Fifteen mins and also a clean automobile eventually, the Dustbuster had actually over verified that auto hoover have actually carried on. While Auto da-fé possesses a really certain, explicit meaning, words Blendung in German may be analyzed in a different way, particularly as Blinding or even Deceptiveness or even Masquerade. But as mentioned you may get the least expensive, best-priced auto insurance in Georgia if you feel in one's bones how to create ways to decrease your insurance coverage superiors. Inning accordance with data the provider shown to HuffPost, Honda and also Acura dealerships have supplied customers with 60,000 rental or loaner autos considering that May 2014. Get your credit scores document as well as credit report just before you start trying to find your following lorry if you want to understand where you stand with your credit score. When you purchase taken possession of automobiles, have keep in mind from the complying with so that you recognize just what to expect. The XF is the absolute most satisfying automobile in its lesson to own through a decent frame thanks to the means this turns into edges therefore acutely, standing up to physical body healthy and offering lots of grip. The rest of the ride is noiseless, and when our team pull up to your home I screw coming from the vehicle and run up the measures from the residence. This job makes certain that the line of lorries are kept in excellent condition to make sure that the impression actually is a really good one. It does not possess the insane tire-shredding capabilities of a Mercedes E63 AMG wagon, but that checks off the right cartons to become my best regular motorist and household automobile. Fortunately for men is this variation starts to considerably level as male chauffeurs age.