#context is important

[gaijin-fujin-resonance]

Sakurai Atsushi on Gender and Sexuality

A highly-edited version of this interview has been all over Tumblr for ages, but I wanted to know the context of the quotes. So I emailed Cayce (who was the un-credited translator) and this is the rest of the interview showing the context:

Ongaku to Hito March 2018 Sakurai Atsushi No. 0 Interview translated by Cayce

OtH: We finally get to hear the real version of the single. (Note: this is a discussion of Moon Sayonara wo Oshiete)

Sakurai: The “real” version? (laughs) Was there a fake version?

OtH: No, but this song was first released as a remix by Mr. Takkyuu.

Sakurai: That's also the real version (laughs). But, I guess you're right. You wouldn't know the original song from Takkyuu's version.

OtH: It was quite a tease! (laughs) It's a nice song.

Sakurai: It is. This was the first or second song that we wrote for this album.

OtH: Was “Moon” part of the working title?

Sakurai: No, not at all. The working title was a much vaguer word that I'd never heard before.

OtH: Never heard before? Please, tell us. (laughs)

Sakurai: Please ask Imai.

OtH: So you were the one who chose the title “Moon – Tell Me Goodbye.” What kinds of feelings were you having when you wrote the lyrics to this song?

Sakurai: Well, the song has a gentle melody and chord progression. So I started there, and then there were various situations on the days when I was writing, and information I'd absorbed, and all of that informed the lyrics I wrote.

OtH: The moon is a motif you've worked with again and again over the years.

Sakurai: It is… maybe this is obvious, but it's the opposite of the sun. Shadows exist precisely because there is light and brightness. Somehow, that's where my sensibility always ends up. I think I find it calming. When the sun is shining bright, I always feel like I have to begin something, like a new year… a new semester...

OtH: Hahaha. Just because of the sun?

Sakurai: I just feel that way compulsively. But on the flip side, the moon always calms me. In the evening, when I see the moon come out at twilight, I feel like I can finally relax.

OtH: Like it's “your” time of day.

Sakurai: That's right.

OtH: These lyrics are written in women's speech. Does that mean this is more of a story than a song about you, personally?

Sakurai: That's right. Yes. You could say I'm fully performing a role, but the gender doesn't matter. It could be a woman, or it could be a man. But I felt that women's speech was gentler and softer and fit more easily into the song. So I decided I would play the role. It has nothing to do with gender.

OtH: I get the sense you've been using women's speech more and more in recent years.

Sakurai: ...doesn't it? I feel like I did it earlier, too, though.

OtH: You definitely did it earlier. But now you're able to get all pumped up to sing the role of the entirely fictional image of a woman in Imai's “The Seaside Story.” I think that kind of style has made more of an impression lately.

Sakurai: Uh… well, I guess I want to transcend gender. It's part of the job. I think it's more interesting for the audience if I have fun trying out different sorts of things. The moment I get embarrassed about this kind of thing, I'm finished.

OtH: True. You getting embarrassed would be a turn-off!

Sakurai: Yeah. But I think it's only recently that I've really become able to get pumped up about it like I do now. It's become more fun for me, too. I feel like I'm transforming into something else.

OtH: I suppose your image is similar to David Bowie's pansexuality. Or maybe it's a more Japanese image of femininity.

Sakurai: Yeah. ...I think it's more Japanese style. Bowie's calculated androgyny was certainly surprising as a work of art, but when I act a role for myself, it's the refined femininity of ancient Japan, but with power. That's what I become. In fact, I have a number of friends and acquaintances like that. Men, but with women's souls, something like that. When I look at people like them, I think… “it suits them so naturally,” or “I quite like this.” They also seem very gentle to me… what we were talking about, again? (laughs)

OtH: Hahaha. This is interesting. Please continue.

Sakurai: I suppose I have a bit of that element or quality myself. When I was a child, I felt more comfortable playing with girls. Even now I sometimes get told that I'm “feminine.”

OtH: If you went down that path, do you think you could love a man?

Sakurai: Yes.

OtH: ...what kind of interview is this, anyway? (laughs)

Sakurai: Of course, it's a bit different from sexual romantic love. But when I look at someone like Issay, he doesn't have exactly the same aesthetic as I do, but when I talk with people like him I think, “oh, I love this person!” I think that's fine. I think we should be free of the “men should be manly!” line of thinking.

[revolutionsingingintherainnn]

some landolove 🫶✨🧡

[crepesuzette2023]

That Klaus Voormann Interview where he says he might have been a better bass player for the Beatles than Paul

I got curious about this after reading this post about Klaus and Paul by @thewalrusespublicist. I saw that there was some interest in the interview in the comments, but that people hadn't been able to find it.

Original article (German) here (Süddeutsche Zeitung, 2010)

Quick & dirty translation into English by: moi

• Humor translates poorly, especially without audio. I tried my best, but can’t guarantee I captured the tone perfectly.

• Apologies for the n-slur in the quote from Klaus’s grandmother. I left it in because it illustrates Klaus’s background and the spirit of the times.

• Speaking of: context is important, so I decided to translate the whole thing.

• Klaus is 5 years older than Paul — I must have known this, but didn’t realize how it must have impacted their relationship in Hamburg before now.

• I wasn’t able to find other English translations, which is why I did this one, but if you know of any, or have done one: let me know and I will add a link. And sorry, I didn’t mean to ignore anyone’s work.

------

Klaus Voormann: I should explain something right away: I have a real problem with dyslexia.

SZaW: Reading the menu?

Voormann: I have to read it out loud. I have to hear it to understand it. If I say "Knoblauchspeck mit Hausbrot" out loud, it’s there right away, and I won’t forget it.

SZaW: Is it an artists’ affliction?

Voormann: I don’t know. But it caused many hang-ups and problems I’m still carrying around with me.

SZaW: Were the 1950’s that bad?

Voormann: It was bad for me in the sense that none of my teachers realized I was dyslexic. The teacher said, “read from the book,” and I wanted to disappear from the earth. Chemistry didn’t interest me, historical dates didn’t mean anything to me, but the teachers wanted to beat it into you.

SZaW: But then you quit school to go to Hamburg, where, in the autumn of 1960, you discovered an obscure band from Liverpool called “The Beatles.” You can’t have been twenty yet [he was 22], I believe George Harrison was only 17. Stupid question: What were they like?

Voormann: Loud. I heard this noise from a basement at the Reeperbahn, and followed it. It grabbed me right away, because this was music I could hear and see right there in Hamburg: not a disc, no radio, but real people playing! I was amazed by the momentum they unleashed with only three instruments.  

SZaW: And you just went to them?

Voormann: During the break, I went to them and introduced myself. They looked incredibly strange: Studded jackets, hair in a DA, the boots [with the fur, just kidding]. Back then, I worked as a graphic designer for Hörzu und Kristall, but I wanted to design record sleeves. John Lennon pointed me to Stuart Sutcliffe and said, “talk to him, he’s our artist.”

SZaW: You wouldn’t expect studded jacket music to appeal to a coddled boy from the Berlin upper class.

Voormann: According to my mother, it was boogie-woogie, “negro music,” from the jungle. But to me, the Beatles were a revelation, as if I’d suddenly learned to roller skate or race on a motorbike. Up to that point, there’s been jazz on the one side, classical music on the other. Suddenly, something fresh entered the scene. You could tell they didn’t speak for the elite, but for the simple people: the toilet cleaner getting off in the back [???], the pimp who thinks it’s hot, or a famous photographer who’s obsessed with it.

SZaW: Your family back home must have been pleased. Rumor has it your grandfather owned a whole district back in Berlin.  

Voormann: My grandfather basically owned all of Heiligensee. He had shares in oil companies and South African diamond mines. Unfortunately, I didn’t meet him. He died before the inflation of 1923.

SZaW: Lucky for him.

Voormann: That depends.

SZaW: So, all that money became worthless inflation-billions?

Voormann: As children, we were playing roulette with the bills.

SZaW: A pastime fitting your class.

Voormann: My grandmother used to go to Monte Carlo to gamble.

SZaW: With real money?

Voormann: Back then it was real. I would have loved to know my grandfather; he was a great guy. There are stories about him throwing gold coins in the air because he enjoyed the girls screaming and jumping, trying to catch them. He liked to go out, and he had other women. When he came home, he brought back a silver plate of oysters for my grandmother, his “little dove.” My grandmother got angry and kicked the plate out of his hand, and he said, “my little dove, I didn’t know oysters could fly.” Then they made up.

SZaW: It must have been a better world. Obviously, you diligently followed your piano lessons as a child.

Voormann: I played Chopin, performed in concerts, and I might have become a good pianist. But at the time, it felt too risky. My parents didn’t want it, and ultimately, I didn’t, either. And so, it was decided I should become a graphics designer.  

SZaW: Coming from this world, entering the sweaty cellars of Hamburg must have felt like a descent into hell.

Voormann: Of course. It wasn't a protest, per se, but I went away, went to art school in Hamburg, and broke free from my family bonds. This music thing wouldn’t leave me alone, this love came from the gut. The Beatles added the heart.

SZaW: The Hamburg Beatles were a five-piece band, John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, Stuart Sutcliffe and the drummer, Pete Best. Times must have been rough. Albert Goldmann writes in his biography that John killed a sailor on the Reeperbahn. And Stu Sutcliffe’s sister keeps saying Lennon killed her brother.

Voormann: Of course there were fights where Stuart got beaten up, not by John, but by blokes whose girlfriends liked Stuart.

SZaW: And Lennon was supposed to be a closet case, who had an affair with Stuart . . .

Voormann: Complete nonsense. The two of them knew each other since they went to school together in Liverpool, after all. I liked Stuart, too, and we, as guys, would hug each other from time to time. He was a charismatic artist, that was all. In my whole life, I never met anyone who saw and perceived as much as this little boy—no matter if it was a bird or the sound of a train.

SZaW: And why was this good-looking boy so ashamed on stage he stood with his back to the audience?

Voormann: He wasn’t ashamed of his looks; he was ashamed he didn’t know what he was doing on guitar. Not that rock’n’roll has a lot to do with actual music. "Tutti Frutti," for instance, has three repeating chords, and all the bass needs to play is the root note. Great musicianship isn’t part of it. For Stuart, it was difficult, because not only was he not a musician, he didn’t want to be one. Still, his love of rock’n’roll was enormous, and his charisma was on par with Elvis Presley. [KLAUS!!!!]

SZaW: Stuart was posing, whereas George Harrison practiced until his fingers bled.

Voormann: George had a very ambitious way to make licks his own. He couldn’t improvise chords on the spot like Eric Clapton; he had to craft them and put them together. If anyone fit the type of lead guitarist, it was Paul McCartney.

SZaW: Before he became the bassist, Paul played second guitar back in Hamburg.

Voormann: Most of the time. Later, in the "Top Ten" or in the "Star Club,” he also played the piano, simple stuff.

SZaW: Because rock'n'roll isn’t real music.

Voormann: Well, it isn’t.

SZaW: And yet, you wanted to play rock’n’roll at all costs?

Voormann: At some point, I bought Stuart Sutcliffe’s bass for 200 DM, because he wanted to paint. Later, I actually turned out to be a good bass player.

SZaW: because you spent a lot of time watching from the audience?

Voormann: I had the tools from my classical training, but I had no idea how to play on a stage. I played the songs I heard on the Reeperbahn at home, by myself.  

SZaW: Stu Sutcliffe couldn’t, and didn’t want to play. Did you want to take his place?

Voormann: Maybe. During their final show together, I went to John and said, “Well, John, would it be possible for me to play bass?” And he said, “Sorry, Klaus, Paul already bought a bass. He’s going to be our new bassist.”

SZaW: Close, but no cigar.

Voormann: Hm.

SZaW: You came close, but when world fame started, you weren’t on board. Is that a good way of putting it?

Voormann: Hm, yes it is.

SZaW: Do you regret it?

Voormann: It would be interesting to know what would have happened. They wouldn’t have been with four, but with five. Would it have worked? Would I have fit in? The Stones were a five-piece.  

SZaW: A six-piece, originally. They fired piano player Ian Stewart, because he wasn’t pretty enough.

Voormann: They certainly couldn't have accused me of that.

SZaW: Ex-Beatle Pete Best sometimes goes on revival tours, and still feels cheated.

Voormann: And if he lives to be a hundred years old: Pete Best is not a good drummer. He simply didn’t have the charisma for a band this powerful. Maybe I lacked that charisma, too, but it was Ringo who got things swinging.

SZaW: Like Pete Best, you narrowly missed your chance.

Voormann: If you look at the musical roots of the Beatles, I would have fit better, in some ways, than Paul.

SZaW: Ja?

Voormann: Many people will take this the wrong way if I'm saying it here, but I approach bass playing completely differently. I would have stood for something primitive, earthy. If I’d been in the band, I would have used my influence to push for more rhythm and blues.

SZaW: For the Hamburg cellar dwellers.

Voormann: I know that John could have been closer to these roots, that later came through in a few numbers. But from the moment they became Lennon-McCartney, that disappeared completely—"Please Please Me", "She Loves You", "Help" and everything. They took off towards a completely new style of music, and I probably would have been an obstacle.

SZaW: Unlike Paul McCartney, who seduces the camera with his puppy eyes in Let It Be.

Voormann: The charlatan.

SZaW: But important, because of the girls.

Voormann: Without Paul, Beatlemania wouldn’t have happened. Paul is an entertainer; he can handle an audience. Different from John, who wasn’t a front man.

SZaW: He could be very forward on the Hamburg stage, when he greeted the audience with "Sieg Heil!"

Voormann: He was joking.

SZaW: Nazi jokes.

Voormann: All of that was unprofessional stuff. Professionalism came from Paul.

SZaW: Is it true John and Paul brought the mop top haircut back from Paris?

Voormann: They were there, but still: Stuart had the hairstyle first.

SZaW: Who cut his hair?

Voormann: Astrid Kirchherr. But I don’t want to revisit that story, it’s so embarrassing.

SZaW: Why not? Hamburg’s only contribution to the world’s cultural heritage.

Voormann: I was the first to have his hair cut in this style by Astrid, and then the others wanted it, too.

SZaW: Where is Stu Sutcliffe’s bass guitar now?

Voormann: I needed money at some point, and had it auctioned off at Sotheby’s for thirty- or forty-thousand Mark. Stu’s sister bitched and complained, theft, etc., and that’s why I only got a couple of thousand Mark. I wish I could undo the sale. I would like to have the bass.

[iceeericeee]

Can someone who has never seen psych before please explain what’s going on in this gif?

[badninken]

Finally watching the Egghead arc properly. Haven't done any live reaction posts though so here is a quick summary of my feels:

Animation: WOW! Lore reveals: WOW! Luffy: OMFG!!

That first screenshot is so reminiscent of the celestial dragon punch that also made me scream out loud. And red glowy devil eyed Luffy of laughing liberation is SO SCARY, I love him.

Also the animation has to be mentioned again because holy fuck it gets better and better. I've been watching Punk Hazard and Dressrosa episodes on repeat which isn't the most aesthetically pleasing experience.

I am now pleased

[transgwender616]

I wish more people online knew what context and nuance is

"You shouldn't nail rats to strangers."

"Oh so your saying nailing is always wrong even if i'm making a house?"

"No i'm saying you shouldn't nail rats to strangers."

[lady-phasma]

personal journey of discovery and unraveling but it brings him back to Daemon

[twopoppies]

Gina there’s an ex larrie on threads and she hates harry and louis now but she has thousands of followers and every single day she writes a new post to debunk larry. Yesterday she said that larry was never real because harry was with nick especially in 2012/13 and she said that even caroline flack outed harry and nick. Is this true? Her followers are so curious and want to know more about that story. She said that caroline literally wrote a tweet that said nick slept with hary and I saw that some of her followers were sad that it happened and now they’re unlarrying. 🤦🏻‍♀️

Why do people listen to these idiots? I think that person is on tumblr, too. I’ve forgotten their name, but come on guys.

First of all, Caroline would never have tweeted anything like that. Second, there were numerous reports of Nick being used to draw attention away from Louis and to sow doubt about the idea that Larry even existed. If you were here at the time (which I’ll bet you that person wasn’t), you’d know how desperate 1DHQ was to make it look like there was no “Larry.”

I mean, look, I don’t really care if people believe Harry and Louis were together or weren’t. I’m long past the days where I felt I needed to prove it to anyone. But it really disturbs me that there are people out there gaslighting new fans into believing shit with no proof to back it up.

I'm afraid I don't have the time or interest to counter their dumb arguments, but there's plenty of info in my GRYLES tag (I linked it chronologically, so you should find some detailed old posts).

This is one of my favorite Larry receipts where Nick is involved.

Over all, I would really caution people to do what you're doing. Try to find context for what people are claiming (larries as well as antis). Larries still spread "proof" because they don't know it was long-debunked. But there's so much info out there that will give you a bigger picture.

The bottom line is, if "Larry" was so easy to debunk, do you actually think people would still be here believing in it FIFTEEN YEARS LATER?

[nalyra-dreaming]

The reblogs are turned off on the post so let me answer here @momthesearemydinnerguests

“It's a major plot point in TVL that after Armand bites him, Lestat drags him out of the hall, beats Armand to a bloody pulp (to the point Armand's face is unrecognizable), and then feels such intense remorse for it that he has to distance himself from everyone for a bit. Even when Lestat begs Louis to tell him he could never love him, it feels like a direct callback to his conversation with Armand after that scene, when he tells Armand that they could never love each other. And the way Lestat drops/throws Louis mirrors the way Armand throws Lestat from the tower later on - which is in itself a direct response to Lestat's abandonment.“

Like… you just answered your own objection?! THAT is what book fans have been pointing out. And the tale being a tale. And all the hints by writers, cast etc. And what Jacob said, too.

It’s not about whether Lestat could do it, or has done it (in other context, and context is important!) to others. (Also Lestat beating up Armand when Armand tried to rape him? NOT the same!)

It’s about the doubts of the tale as it’s being presented and being called names for that.

And now, now that panels etc underline that point, now that the statements that there was indeed “tinkering“ there as said… well. Suddenly there’s people calling it bad writing. etc.

The post was not about abuse in and by itself being non-existent. But I am fed up pretending everything we‘ve seen is to be treated as the truth, when THEY actually, literally say it isn‘t.

[rrcraft-and-lore]

Sōham - Sanskrit.

But what is it?

Well, "I am--," used in mantra/breathwork meditation to a chant that is commonly: "I am that I am," and or, "I am one with the Universe and all of creation."

Sound familiar?

It is identifying oneself as part of the fabric of reality creation.

It can also be interpreted as, "I am the absolute," or, "I am the great truth."

Depends on context/modification.

[yearofinstitutionalization]

Living in My Day of Denial and Separation

[fanthirtheen]

I love Stolas and Blitzo’s struggling relationship so much because I relate to Blitzo (and Stolas) in ways I've latched onto. I guess I can see why some people don't like Stolas and his attitude and selfishness and his struggles give them an ick, because ultimately, fiction reflects life. Our favorite characters tend to be people we can project onto or people we wish we had in our lives.

Blitzo doesn't think he can be loved. He makes himself useful so he has some control over the terms in which he is in other people's lives. He doesn't want to be alone, and he doesn't want to be vulnerable enough to chance someone seeing him for what he is and deciding they didn't like it, they didn't like him, and leaving. So he makes himself into something they need, rather than finding someone who wants what he is.

And Stolas wants what he is. Stolas wants him. Stolas's love for Blitzo is an incredibly selfish love, and I understand why so many people don't like that. I can see a lot of people don't like that selfish love, they see real world people they have had bad experiences with in Stolas, and you know, that's what fiction is about.

But I love Stolas and I love Stolitz because I am incredibly satisfied and fulfilled seeing them together. Blitzo needs that selfish love. He needs someone to be selfish about him, to want him unrelated to all the bullshit he hides behind, to want him enough and in such a selfish way they can want him past the bullshit he pulls to push people away.

I've explored that dynamic in other fandoms some, but I cobbled it together from scratch. Not headcannons or anything lime that, just, from writing stories so much I corner myself in a dynamic that feels so right to me and so satisfying. One character doesn't know how to be wanted so they make themselves needed instead. The other character is so tired of being selfless or giving up things they want or not being allowed to have something of their own that when they get attached to the character that commodifies themselves, they decide with their whole heart that THIS is what they want. This person. This will be their first thing they want to keep and they want it selfishly.

And maybe it isn't picture-perfect healthy but it's good for them. The struggle isn't admitting they're in love with each other, the struggle is believing someone sees you for what you are not what you pretend to be to make yourself useful, and they want you so selfishly they will keep you even when you're not breaking yourself to be useful. And in getting what you want for the first time in your entire life and it being better than you ever dreamed.

So I kind of get it when people don't like Stolas. He is a bit selfish. But Blitzo needs him to be selfish, because Stolas’s "selfish" doesn't necessarily mean Blitzo giving anything up except his facade.

When the selfish character wants to keep the other character, not in a "you have to change your life to accommodate me" kind of way but in a "I love your life the way it is don't change I just want to be there with you" sort of way.

[citrus-cactus]

Making an 8-page zine about ✨The Character✨ and having a great time, BUT ALSO……….. needing 3 pages to explain his backstory and feeling like I had to cut out way too much detail to make it fit… rough…..🥲

[lady-phasma]

Whispers of the Realm - Olivia Cooke & Emma D'Arcy

[an-fadhb]

American society (along with many, many other societies) was built to keep disabled people hidden away. Only in the last 40 years have attitudes about that started to change, and there's an extremely long way to go.

Of COURSE there were no wheelchair ramps built by anarchists. There were no ramps built by ANYONE. Do you guys really think ableism is exclusive to the capitalist mindset? It's a literal cultural institution the way racism is.

The reason I’m not an anarchist is that in the centuries before the Americans with disabilities act people could have all installed safe wheelchair ramps in all of their buildings and they didn’t.

If you’re trying to make a system that relies on people being nice I’m not gonna go with it.

[rubberduckearrings]

"i'm a submissive, troubled, gay man. i need you to dominate me because it gives me direction and a purpose in life" - rossi, s3 e7