#A View from the Q

[skopostheorie]

good job tumblr, now look what youve done... theres two of them!

HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLY SHIT.

[melodyartist]

What all the brothers think k about Cronos? After all it’s a bit because of him they are … chained

Atlas:"Oh wow! These questions bring back a lot of memories with Uncle C, there are some bad ones and some good ones...I mean, I had a strong opinion back then, I was rash just like Menoetius, I led the legions proudly but as you can see it didn't end well for any of us ah ah ah! I learned from my mistake, and I'm not gonna blame anyone else for them, look at Epimetheus he made the smart decision to side with the gods"

Epimetheus:" I'm gonna give Promy the credit for that, but I think that siding with Chronos wasn't a mistake, the Olympians kinda sucks"

Menoetius:"Those times of war were a mess! All of that to be slain by the gods and thrown into a pit... I think that Prometheus is the one that feels most strongly about Chronos, he sided for the gods once and then for Chronos "

Prometheus:"..."

*he is shutting up rn because he knows he would rant endlessly about how much he hates the gods and how much he doesn't totally agree on Chronos view but at the same time he is cool with the idea of overthrowing the government and bringing back whatever was going before just because Chronos promised a new gold age for the humans and the guy wants the best for them but at the same time he is conflicted and wants them to feel the torment that he felt*"

[vanitasaurus]

serenity

[cyberpunkaddict]

Cyberpunk 2077 💙 Badlands

[magiefish]

Something I've kind of noticed about a lot of the academic scholarship I've read about Frankenstein / Dracula / Jekyll & Hyde is that everyone just seems to completely dismiss/ignore the characters as actual characters most of the time unless they're the Main Guys. Like, they'll go really in depth about Victor or the Creature's motivations and backstory and spend ages talking about Jekyll's relationship to Hyde and stuff, but the second it comes to characters like Enfield and Elizabeth or Lanyon and Clerval or frankly the Entire Rest of the Cast of Dracula, they just immediately seem uninterested. They'll just sort of vaguely gesture in their direction and go 'Oh yeah X and X thing happens to this character and here's a one sentence summary of their personality which doesn't really matter because this entire cast is interchangeable, anyway, onto the next theme' and half the time their One Sentence is just textually incorrect (looking at the New Woman/Traditional Woman descriptions of Lucy and Mina). And the reason I find this so baffling is because with other analysis I've read (e.g. Great Gatsby stuff) people seem to actually slow down and consider the characterisation and motivations of the cast as a whole with like. Nuance. Like they sit down and treat the characters as multifaceted and complex and having actual relationships with one another, and then you get to these books specifically and no one seems to care? Like they'll go really in depth with various interpretations and historical context for the Big Guys, and then never apply the same sort of examination to anyone else, and if they do, very rarely and probably only for one other character e.g. (Utterson or Mina).

If I had to posit an explanation, I would say its a combination of the archetypal nature of the title characters and the admittedly patchy writing of these books (which arguably lends to their archetypal status). I think academics kind of assume that the primary draw of these books are The Big Guys and the expansive themes and ideas they cover and that everyone else is just a pawn there to enable the narrative around the Big Guys, and the propensity for film adaptations to scrap or rewrite characters probably compounded this impression. And while I think this is at least partly true, the thing is, these characters were not always archetypal Big Guys. They originated in stories alongside *these* other characters *specifically* and it is worth asking what it is about the rest of the cast that makes the story interesting as well. Because, let's be real, if there was approximately no interest in the fucking *narrators* of Dracula, the best friends of Henry Jekyll, or the victims of the Creature, the original readers would have been completely bored out of their minds for most of these novels and public interest in them would not have been as great as it was. All of these novels were stories before they were myths, and academics should not be letting pop culture eclipse them unless they're specifically talking about the relationship between the two.

Overall, I just feel like academics are not only shooting themselves in the foot, but also doing a disservice to these stories by not bothering to investigate the other characters because frankly. It's lazy. It's lazy to dismiss an entire cast and basically skim read any sections involving them just because it's easy to focus on The One Guy. If you people really cared about themes, you'd understand that characters are inextricable from them. Like shit dude I see more care given to characters in essays about Greek tragedies, you guys are waaaay fucking behind

[faust-terrorsofthenight]

do you per chance like kento nanami?

Hi twinkeycat!!! Ty for the ask! :)

To answer your question.. Just a smidge

Just a teensy tiny smidge

Best horse girl 🤧💜

Who's your favourite?

[msue0027]

Rip merlin, you would have loved tesco next to the castle

[cuntwrap--supreme]

I've been doing a lot of grocery delivery in the country lately, so I ordered myself a nice bumper sticker so I fit in with everyone else's stuff :)

I've seen a lot of these lately, but they were all of a pride flag I don't recognize. Not sure which gender/sexuality has the red and white stripes with the blue with white stars in the corner, but I guess it's an ok design. The rainbow is the traditional LGBT flag, though, so I feel it symbolizes the collective queer community a little better and will be a little more noticeable/recognizable than niche flags, like this stars and stripes guy.

[nerds-yearbook]

Appendix "Q" On Film

Peter Burton (Major Boothroyd) - Dr No (1962)

Desmond Llewelyn (Boothroyd/Q) - From Russia with Love (1963), Goldfinger (1964), Thunderball (1965), You Only Live Twice (1967), On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969), Diamonds Are Forever (1971), The Man With a Golden Gun (1974), The Spy Who Loved Me (1977), Moonraker (1979), For Your Eyes Only (1981), Octopussy (1983), A View to a Kill (1985), The Living Daylights (1987), Licence to Kill (1989), GoldenEye (1995), Tomorrow Never Dies (1997), The World Is Not Enough (1999),

Geoffrey Bayldon - Casino Royale (1967)

Alec McCowen (Q/Algy) - Never Say Never Again (1983)

John Cleese - (R) The World Is Not Enough (1999), (Q) Die Another Day (2002)

Ben Wishaw - Skyfall (2012), Spectre (2015), No Time to Die (2021)

[em-um-canto]

Q!pac enjoying reverse gravity was so fun (he kept dying to fall damage thinking the event was over when it was not)

[shadowslocked]

It's probably way more lighthearted than I'm feeling but I don't really care for Q!Forever getting upset at Bad and Baghera for literally just...talking to each other. Like, if he wanted to talk about the nether...he could go talk to them about the nether instead of assuming that every piece of info not given to him is being intentionally kept from him

[oliveish]

Heavy in Your Arms by Florence and the Machines is a purgatory slimeriana song. Cmon. It’s perfect

[flovverworks]

gah i need to ramble. i dont know how itd work/how to not make it push things too far/itd be useless anyway since akira knows 0 about fighting/does noooot have the stamina most ppl who end up fighting does<3, but taking the whole "can help oz use magic at night" into a buffer concept.......cuz i dont find a way to use that stuff/the sages book/etc in aus enough T_T something something when akira forms bonds with ppl............. so i was like "ig their evol could be something where i can work around it into that" BUT I DONT WANT THEM TO HAVE ONE........my normal little guy............who somehow can enhance u should the need come......

BUT it means i end up thinking about the time oz killed someone in front of akira. cuz it was at night/dawn. 'have u seen a wizard turn to stone' 'no' and holding them in a way so they wouldnt see auughhhhhh...........->figaro who ALSO has killed someon(something) in front of akira. and how quiet akira is after. no further comment i should reread that spot story now that its voiced

[the-liminal-place]

— Benjamin Francis Cassidy, January 2024.

[h0l0gramglasses]

been imagining dark (sfw) scenarios regarding my oc and Q and it’s got me thinking - what do you think would have happened if one of the crew members aboard the enterprise had regarded Q’s appearance as a religious experience and begun to worship him? what do you think the senior officers’ reactions would be if they found out? how far would they take it? would it begin with them praying to him to spare them from more trickery, then devolve into more sinister intentions (i.e. ‘deal with the devil’ type stuff)? and how would Q take it? would he indulge it? in I, Q, Q says that he abhors being worshipped and is more inclined to maliciously target those who revere him as a god. would it all end in tragedy, despite the crew member’s best intentions to keep them all from harm?

[thomine]

🎧 - Mimikyu

( from send a🎧 and i'll give you my favourite verse! requested by @andromeda-nova-writing )

favourite verse from this song is:

i don't know just yet who you take me to be / and i don't want to spoil your impression of me

things have gotten better over the years, but i do notice my tendency to "morph" and become someone who the other person wants me to be. i tend to avoid people i can't "read", and by "read" i mean i don't know how these people view me—what they want from me, what they see me as—so i have no "form" to take in front of them.

i feel these lyrics are quite fitting for a person like myself, lol.