#artist: in her own words

[lyricallymnded]

lyricallymnded’s end of year celebration! | nikki’s favorite songs released in 2022

circles // in her own words & derek discanio

[robinsversion]

I was rewatching hbomb’s video for the millionth time yesterday and the line “I don’t know why anyone would make video essays like this unless they were strictly in it for the money” stood out to me because if you replace “make video essays” with “write poetry” that perfectly describes my thoughts about Rupi Kaur.

[thisispoggers]

HC that Shakes is a shower singer in private

[sadbeautifutragic]

.

[ucami]

HAPWA!!

[oc: angelette]

[philosophicallie]

ok time to try to blame someone else instead of me

[soupbirded]

Improve ya art

my final message. Goodbye

(I'm finally done with ever improvement hell prompt, and this one specifically I am SO PROUD OF, please spend a minute and stare at it because that's what I'm going to be doing for the next week <3 have a good one, this was fun)

[titsthedamnseason]

there’s a family friend at our house who’s in 6th grade and all the kids were asking me where i went to college so he said “i want to go to harvard” and when i told him that was a great goal he said “im trying…..i got high honor roll twice now so i hope so” 🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺

[artsycloudysleepy]

looking back through drawings from when i was about 6yo im guessing?? and i loved the expressions of this poor penguin so onto tumblr it goes XD

OLD ART:

(animals: bunny, penguin, giraffe)

(please note: i have not improved since at drawing animals /hj)

[tamaharu]

ive inherited a copy of lolita from my parents (i.e. i stole it from the library in our basement and started treating it like its mine) with the 1989 vintage international cover and i think its actually not that bad. better than the 50th anniversary one with the lips anyway imo (which is the cover for the library ebook vers ive checked out).

like i think any cover that incorporates the "only convincing love story of our generation" quote anywhere kind of sucks on principle, and the fact that it features a photo of a girl at all really goes against nabakovs instructions, but compared to other covers that break those two rules, the haziness of the photo creates a really evocative atmosphere i feel matches the book more or less.

[florida3exclamationpoints]

.

[paragonrobits]

some important calvin and hobbes facts in case you haven't read the original comic strip in a long time or only absorbed stuff on it from memes and out of context bits on here:

Calvin's last name has never been given, and neither has any of his parent's names. This was actually why his uncle Max only showed up for a brief storyline; the creator of the comic, Bill Watterson, ultimately felt that while it was fine to have him as someone for his parents to talk to, it felt far too awkward to never have Max refer to them by name and he never made a return appearance.

The general tone of the comic is fairly light-hearted, with a big emphasis on goofy slapstick comedy contrasted by clever wordplay and often surprising adult-centered jokes that'll hit you like a slap. A big part of the comedy is, as Watterson put it (paraphrased) "It's really funny to me when people express deeply stupid ideas with really fancy terminology." One notable example you might have seen is that one bit where Calvin asks his mom for money to buy a Satan-worshiping rock album and his mom replies that there's nothing genuine about them and they're just putting on the attitude for shock value, and comisserates with Calvin as he deplores that mainstream nihilism can't be trusted. He concludes that childhood is disillusioning.

There is a LOT of criticism of the extreme materialism and selfish mentality of the late 80s, when the comic was initially written. This may go a long way to explain how its aged so well; much of what it criticizes resonates well with people today.

Bill Watterson views comic strips a legitimate form of artwork, and repeatedly fought to have more space to draw more beautiful and artistic backgrounds, which was a very hard fight and unpopular even with other comic strip artists. He eventually did win some compromises and a lot of Calvin And Hobbes' artwork shows it, with the use of space to indicate time as well as a sharp contrast between the often plain environments of mundane life contrasted by the wildly beautiful imagery of Calvin's imagination (which often sports realistic depictions in an art shift of sorts).

Hobbes is explicitly not an imaginary friend, by word of Watterson himself. We don't know WHAT he is exactly, and Hobbes is apparently unaware of the strange nature of his reality; people look at him and only see an ordinary stuffed tiger plushie, but he has a tangible effect on the world that would be physically impossible for Calvin to do on his own. He's apparently been around for a while, and was apparently around when Calvin was a young baby.

On that note; Hobbes has implicitly killed (notably treated as both a gag and also with the vibe of 'he's a tiger, duh') and while he doesn't do it again on-screen, he doesn't have any moral issues about it. Calvin claims that he's never had trouble bringing Hobbes to school because the last time he did, Hobbes killed and ate a bully named Tommy Chestnut and simply comments that it was gross and he needed a bath. Calvin's tried to repeat this again, but Hobbes was grossed out at the thought having to eat a kid raw and not being allowed to use an oven first, or complaining that children are too fattening.

Hobbes became gradually less human-like in body language and more like an actual cat in both body language and behavior; this was due to Watterson drawing more inspiration from his cat, who also inspired a lot of Hobbes' running gags, such as pouncing on Calvin when he got home. Several years into the syndication of the strip, Watterson's cat passed away, and he did a tribute to her with a comic strip of the two of them agreeing to try to dream together so they can keep playing when they have to sleep; Watterson's commentary (if I recall right), remarks on his cat: "We can see each other again in dreams."

[eunique]

Crazy how my mum doesn't trust me to take care of myself when it's convenient to her 🙃

[pa-pa-plasma]

why are so many posts complimenting an artist like "i genuinely hate their disgusting, horrible, irredeemable, piece of shit work but this one song is good" like are you guys incapable of putting down the word "cringe" for five seconds or

[stellardeer]

I can't stop ruminating on the post I made yesterday where I mentioned not liking the way Drake talks about women in his songs, and I keep trying to justify myself to a fake person in my head, so I'm just gonna write it all down cause I'm on my vyvanse and It's Thoughts Time.

So yesterday I talked about how I haven't been a fan of Drake for a while, even before the incident with Millie Bobby Brown when everyone stopped trusting him, because of the way that he talks to/about women in his songs.

And one could argue that there are plenty of artists who say terrible sexist/misogynistic things about women in their songs, calling them "bitches" and "hoes", using them as props, what have you. Why single out Drake? Why do I say he seems like "the next R Kelly"?

Well, refer to Exhibit A, article detailing R. Kelly's "sex cult". I believe this was the exact article that I read when I first heard about the shady shit that R Kelly was getting up to. This was published in 2017, two years before the sex trafficking charges against him in 2019, at which time the focus was on his underage victims. But the TL;DR for the article above is that R Kelly had his own little sex cult going, consisting of adult women, most of whom he met because they wanted a career in music and they trusted him as an artist and he offered to mentor them. He ends up in an intimate relationship with them, and then they end up moving into a house of his, along with other women under the same circumstances, complete with an older "den mother" type who was there essentially to teach these girls how to please and serve Mr. Kelly.

When people talk about the nasty things that R. Kelly has done, nobody ever really brings this one up. I'm not sure if it's because they just don't know about it, but I would argue that the reason they don't know is because it is not as sensationalized, because this was happening to adult women, not minors. And the women didn't necessarily complain. In fact, they'd have told you they were happy and nothing was wrong and they were being treated well and WANTED to be there, despite having given up whatever passion it was they were pursuing that led them to this life in the first place, and now existing solely as R. Kelly's plaything. These were consenting adult women, so why should anyone care? (Though, surprise surprise, some of them came forward to disclose that everything was not actually fine.) Sadly, this is just how cults work though. I advise reading more on how cults recruit people in order to understand why the consent in these situations is dubious, NXIVM is one in particular that comes to mind if you want a place to start.

Honestly, I think that if I hadn't read the article above ("Exhibit A"), I wouldn't have even been put off by anything in Drake's lyrics. It's very subtle, though. It's the way that it seems like he wants all of the women in his life to stay loyal to him. It doesn't matter if they aren't officially "together" or if he hasn't seen them in months or if he doesn't even speak to them anymore. If they're one of his girls, they should always be one of his girls, ride or die. They aren't allowed to have relationships with other men, but he can have as many relationships with as many women as he wants and they need to just be fine with it. I hear it in "Hotline Bling". I hear it in "In My Feelings". There's probably more that I'm forgetting but it's been a while since I've listened to a song of his and those are two I remember. Just so I could have some credibility I did a search on his relationships and he even admits that he prefers to date 4 or 5 women at a time. He never degrades these women with sexist language in these songs, in fact "In My Feelings" could even be read as a wholesome song, but I couldn't help but feel the ick. I might even just be reading too much into it, but I couldn't ignore how uncomfortable it made me feel so I just stopped listening to his music.

Then the Millie Bobby Brown situation happened and it was like oh okay so I wasn't crazy, and now everybody else sees it too. It should be noted that nothing was ever confirmed as far as him having an inappropriate relationship with her, just that he was "texting her boy advice" and that she was reluctant to divulge details of the conversation because it was private. That alone is enough to raise red flags though, like how did you even come into contact with this 14 yo girl, what connection do you have to her? Why were you texting her privately and talking about dating? Too sus, sorry.

But I can't help but feel like, again, people only notice when it's happening with minors. I'm not sure how many people understand that "grooming" is not a synonym for "pedophilia". It's most often associated with children, especially teens, because teens are a little more savvy and may need extra steps to take advantage of, but even a fully confident grown ass adult can be groomed. Granted, the younger you are the more likely it is to work. I'm pretty sure all of the women in R. Kelly's sex cult were around 18-19 when he met them. There is no magical threshold of wisdom and maturity that you cross the second the clock strikes midnight on your 18th birthday. Predators target younger people because they know that they are more likely to be naive and to not know the signs of abuse or the signs of a cult or the signs of manipulation. But because the people involved are all technically adults, and seemingly consenting, nobody wants to assume anything nefarious is at play. It's only when they get bold and start going after younger and younger targets that it becomes a problem.

I absolutely believe that if Drake could have his own little harem of obedient women he probably would. And that, to me, is way more dangerous than someone just calling women "bitches" in a song.

[ok-ak]

.