#thoughts and gibberish

[gdn7-dollopole]

We deserved more of just Merlin

The little head tilt, the sweet voice and the tiny smile, the moment he asked Arthur:

“Don’t you?”

To Merlin, magic had always been there for everyone to see, to feel.

He is magic, after all.

For all those years, Merlin had believed what he felt was obvious, and that everyone else felt the same way. It was strange to Merlin that Arthur couldn’t understand that the forest, the animals, even the smallest, living in it, were sacred. Because life is sacred. He couldn’t grasp the reason why the knights couldn’t feel that the old Druids’ camp was haunted, and therefore didn’t believe him. He had literally heard death, and cried because of it.

“As if everything is much more than itself.”

The phrase could refer to him too. Merlin is much more than… Him.

That’s what brought his doom. He had never had the chance to truly know himself. He was either a servant, or the sorcerer of a prophecy, or a Dragonlord.

Never just him.

And in this moment we see he had missed being one with nature, breathing in the animals’ lives. He was himself again.

He was vibrating, much like anything else there living with him.

They never went deep into Merlin’s powers, they were just there for Arthur. Merlin had lost sight of what he wanted to do with them, he even forgot he was so powerful he could have overthrown Arthur himself, if he really wished to.

Merlin was the only man alive able to see Avalon.

During the knights and the king’s quest to save Gwen, Merlin met the Queen of a Queendom no one had ever even seen.

He could have killed Morgana (and did try) multiple times, although she was an High Priestess, and simply decided not to, but he had more than just the power to do so.

The Catha, the Druids bowed to him, met him in the woods, called to him.

Merlin created a telepathic connection with Arthur the first days he was in Camelot.

He survived death multiple times.

His immortality forbid him to die.

Merlin hated hunting because he could feel the animals being scared, followed; he had recognised Gwen when Morgana transformed her into a deer; he could hear the magic around him, inside objects and inside people, like a whisper, as if it was nothing; he could call lightning from the sky.

He could stop the time, or at least slow it down.

Every magical being knew him by name only. But he was not a leader, he was just different.

“Is she like me?” “No one is like you, Merlin.”

After everything he had witnessed, even Gaius knew Merlin was special and did nothing to help him understand why he was.

Merlin was the reason Aithusa was born, why Kilgharrah was free, and we were robbed of him getting to really know his powers, both as a Dragonlord and as the most powerful sorcerer to ever walk the earth.

He literally deleted himself just to be at Arthur’ side, and it hurt him. We saw it constantly. He was sad not only because everyone and everything was against him, or because he couldn’t use magic for simple tricks, but because he couldn’t really know what he could do, both as a magical being and as just Merlin.

To study his powers meant treason and death, and Merlin forbid himself to go beyond what he already knew.

His incapacity to understand, his lack of will to know, and his indecision about who he was, literally helped the fall of the great destiny he was a part of.

Merlin’s decisions, whatever he wanted them to happen or not, helped Arthur die.

Merlin’s real enemy was himself.

[crabussy]

for the record I think wind turbines are beautiful and are not a stain on any landscape and the sounds they make are beautiful and whenever I see one I am filled with love for human innovation and hope for the future of clean energy and if they needed to be built close to my house I would go YAYY ^_^ WAHOO ^_^ WIND TURBINE!!

[emilyartstudio-s]

Sketch Book Clutter 👹

More sketchbook pages and never before seen art on patreon <3!

[sag-dab-sar]

📖 Myth & Sacred Scripture 📖

In Hellenic Polytheism and Mesopotamian Polytheism (and others but I don't want to speak for them) there is no sacred scripture where the words of a God are given to a myth writer and that writing is then declared holy by some form of religious authority.

The idea that myths are the literal actions of the Gods come from a concept of sacred scripture. Sacred meaning the words have holy implications or they have a fundamentally important connection to the divine. This understanding of religious writings is demonstrated in:

Protestant Christianity where the Bible is divinely inspired (usually derived from 1 Timothy 3:16 & 2 Peter 1:12). Additionally, in Trinitarian Christianity Jesus is God making his words in the Gospels the literal words of God.

Islam where the Quran are the words of God given to Mohammad via the angel Gabriel over the course of his life.

Judaism where traditionally the written Torah are the words of God given to Moses at Mt Sinai.

**There are more examples but I'm not going to try and talk about something I did not study.

This pervasive idea of scripture being the words of God embeds itself into a general view of what religion supposedly is because:

Christianity is the largest religion in the world.

Christianity is the dominant religion in English speaking countries, so when we have these discussions in English it tends to have that cultural Christian viewpoint.

Islam is the second largest religion in the world.

Islam considers the Jewish and Christian scriptures to also be given from God, but they have been corrupted in one way or another. This combination can put a mistaken emphasis on sacred scripture being a fundamental aspect of religion.

Even though Judaism is a very small religion the the written Torah is considered part of the Christian Old Testament (first five books). Christians interpret the scripture completely differently but the idea of Moses receiving the Word of God at Mt Sinai continues into Christianity from Judaism.

In many "dead religions" the closest you can come to the "words of the gods" might be the writings of ancient oracles or those who communed directly with spirits & gods. However, in Greece and Mesopotamia there was no centralized religion or continuous tradition to overview and canonize them into sacred scripture. Additionally, those are not usually what people are talking about when they refer to myth.

Myth is extremely important, but mythic literalism is a misstep people make, often due to our preconceived notions of sacred scriptures and their connection to the divine.

-dyslexic not audio proof read-

-I hope this makes sense-

[spookygibberish]

Dogstock are typical of what are often deemed the ‘evil’ races in many other fantasy works. They were created by some higher force to be slaves, they are carnivorous by nature, they resemble animals other than human in dentition and build. They growl and bite and walk behind.

The Uhasr (a dogstock culture) are descendants of such slave-infantry that was abandoned when the empire that used them to capture the steppes decided the land wasn’t so profitable after all, and more pressing matters drew their attention elsewhere. Like tools left spent on the ground, the unneeded, excess dogstock were left to survive on their own in Hochkiskuph. The native peoples, of course, did not welcome them any more, or see them any less as oppressors when the hand released the lead. To the Hochkiskuph peoples, the Uhasr are a predatory ghost, an echo that consumes them even in absentia. To the Uhasr, one human is much like another, differing in number and equipment, but never in essence. Uhasr are a species of wild animal with a human face. Humans are prey on two legs. Humans smoke and poison uncovered dens on principle, Uhasr abduct and consume men and women and children all the same.

A common trend I have noticed in media which aims to humanize monsters, is that it often relies on passivity. Humanity is contingent upon kindness. The monster that is A Person only so long as they are a harmless thing at heart, something which can be understood and befriended. Their violence is reluctant, their hearts noble. Grace is a concession to the dominated. Only the toothless beast, declawed and pinioned and caged, is one which has earned its personhood. The ontological enemy supersedes the ontological man.

[doctorsiren]

I know nothing about Ena, but I like her design, so uhh art warmup today, once again lawyer

[buds-and-baubles]

hold on hold on i need a minute..

thinking about how tim was given dick's approval and permission to be robin. how when tim went to dick in new york city to train with him that he let him know he's gonna do great when tim was unsure.

how tim is the only batfamily member to have met dick's parents. how dick is the only one to have met both of tim's parents (i'm not really counting when bruce tried to save jack and janet because that wasn't a conversation, it was a rescue).

just.. thinking about batman (1940-2011) issue #436, batman: a lonely place of dying and the new titans (1984-1995) issue #65.

these thoughts are really disjointed but they're constantly rattling in my head. jsut. agh.

[pumpernickelsguy]

Sketched this during my spring break, decided to scan it and share it here!

[0xeyedaisy]

Luigi 🥺

[unraysunshine]

Sethos' and Cyno's parallels are so good, so similar in their struggles as fragments of Hermanubis, but so different in their ideologies and ways of life. Cyno's entire resolve and already knowing how to rail his destiny, while Sethos is just beginning to understand his stand in the world. Both of them suffered the collateral damage of their predecessors' mistakes and actions, and it shaped them so differently, but in the end, that made them make their decisions to break that cycle and start to build things up again, for the peace and harmony that their respective people need.

[sygneth]

it is pretty late and i had the most exhausting day so i may be totally overanalysing BUT

Holmes' "you never heard me talk about Victor Trevor?" as a statement of how important both of them were/are to him? A disguised "taken how often Victor comes to my mind, how come I never mentioned him" and "I want you to know what made me into what I am now. I want you to see me as I was before I became the man you know", and I think it's beautiful

[crabussy]

god I love being an artist I can draw whatever I want forever and that includes redrawing a 1912 la vie parisienne illustration with my speculative biology alien characters

[luniviravosshipper]

The most frustrating thing about liking complex and morally grey—maybe leaning a bit more towards morally black—characters is that you have to deal with both sides of people who try to simplify and reduce that character to a few superficial traits that either absolutely detest that character with all their being or worship them wholeheartedly as a result.

You can’t say you like a character because of their flaws or wrongdoings or else the side that hates that character will take your appreciation of those things as you trying to endorse them and will go out of their way to even suggest that those same flaws or wrongdoings must be reflected within your own life. Because how else could you endorse the actions or beliefs of such a terrible character? But the other side will also mistakenly perceive your appreciation of those imperfections in that character as you trying to justify them and will therefore use it to prove their own viewpoint. The viewpoint that the character wasn’t wrong in the first place and shouldn’t be seen as so complicated of a person because, in their mind, they never actually were. Anyone who sees them as complicated is “misunderstanding” or “misinterpreting” them and their intentions since their motivations were quite simple all along.

I, for whatever reason, am not allowed to like a character in media simply because they’re ambiguous. Because their nuance makes them feel more fleshed out, more real.

I must like them only because I see them as good, and I need to be able to argue why I see them as good.

That seems to be the overarching dispute between those who do and those who don’t like those types of characters. At least from what I’ve noticed.

The thing is, this isn’t even a case of whether or not a character is actually good. I mean, you can write one of the most vile, unarguably evil characters ever and they can still be seen as complex. And one character’s complexity shouldn’t undermine how “good” they might actually be.

I feel like people just hate characters that are written to be multi-dimensional because they themselves can’t as easily fit them into their black and white worldview of morality. It’s not so much of a matter of whether or not that character is actually right or good, it’s more about the fact that people can’t seem to be able to distinguish the difference between what makes a character complex and what ideals they uphold.

And, of course, the fact that people seem to think that you can only like things as long as they can fit within their own sense of morals and ethics. You can’t like something or someone that doesn’t reflect your own values according to them. And if you do, well… Apparently that must certainly say something about you.

Though, again, this is all just stuff I’ve picked up on overtime.

[bvckbiter]

smartwatermagic posting at an ungodly hour to say that alabaster is a volatile combination of both percy and annabeth’s fatal flaws. despite the paltry length of his story, he demonstrates just how dangerous unflinching, unquestioning personal loyalty is and how hubris, while fueling his drive to live and take vengeance and get better at his craft, only feeds into this blind faith—to his own detriment and that of everyone else who orbits him. and he not only suffers to a severe degree, he suffers in a way specifically painful for someone with those fatal flaws: the people he fights for all killed; his influence stripped and demonized.

“like my mirror years ago”: alabaster is a reflection of percy and annabeth’s worst impulses unacted on. alabaster is the (inadvertent, unintentional) scapegoat towards which the consequences of percy and annabeth’s actions have been redirected: percy gifting the olympians the benefit of the doubt, annabeth shouldering luke’s sins then his salvation

[paperstorm]

Chocolate is the ultimate poly bitch, she's married to peanut butter and mint and salt and caramel and orange and coffee and pretzels and bacon and strawberries and almonds and they're all happy and nobody gets jealous

[youth-liberation-june]

i think when most people think of the term child abuse, they might think of physical abuse done to children.

while any kind of mistreatment that happens to children is abuse, i think we should use the term “child discrimination,” as well,

or youth discrimination

so people would know & realize more that children get discriminated against in other ways besides physical abuse.