#but this character isn’t in the book

[parttimesarah]

[tea-cat-arts]

Shen Yuan getting transported into pidw isn't "the system punishing him for being a lazy internet hater," but instead representative of "step 1 of the creative process: getting so mad at something you decide to go write your own fucking book" in this essay I will

[lilsillustration]

percy through the years

[sevenines]

i saw this tweet and found it interesting for two reasons. one is that some people base how good cartoon network would be to toh by how it treated su, and despite the fact that su’s treatment by the network was considered poor at the time, now its thought to be exceptionally good in comparison to modern shows.

two is how exactly su got impacted by a limited budget. a common criticism is how characters like connie, peridot, and lapis are left out of missions. but balancing a lot of characters is not only hard but also costly (extra animation, extra voices—it’s been revealed that the show is limited to a set number of characters per episode otherwise they’re over budget). animation mistakes are not uncommon since retakes cost extra. the entire reason the original show got cut short was due to loss of funding!

[discard-celestia]

poster of lestat de lioncourt as liane de pougy:

based on a poster (under the cut) of french courtesan Liane de Pougy who was openly bisexual, left her husband armand, escaped to paris where she tried acting, had a long-term relationship with a woman whom she wrote a book about after said woman left her, had a long list of affairs, described herself as a terrible mother who saw her child as a doll to dress up, was regarded as one the most beautiful women in Paris, and ultimately became a princess. fascinating woman, really

Poster for Liane de Pougy at the Folies Bergères, Paul Berthon (c. 1890s).

[sunny-rants]

I cannot emphasize enough how much August is for the gays

[ofbreathandflame-archive]

With the rise of booktok/booktwt, there's been this weird movement against literary criticism. It's a bizarre phenomenon, but this uptick in condemnation of criticism is so stifling. I understand that with the rise of these platforms, many people are being reintroduced into the habit of reading, which is why at the base level, I understand why many 'popular' books on booktok tend to be cozier.

The argument always falls into the 'this book means too much to me' or 'let people enjoy things,' which is rhetoric I understand -- at least fundamentally. But reading and writing have always been conduits for criticism, healthy natural criticism. We grow as writers and readers because of criticism. It's just so frustrating to see arguments like "how could you not like this character they've been the x trauma," or "why read this book if you're not going to come out liking it," and it's like...why not. That has always been the point of reading. Having a character go through copious amounts of trauma does not always translate to a character that's well-crafted. Good worldbuilding doesn't always translate to having a good story, or having beautiful prose doesn't always translate into a good plot.

There is just so much that goes into writing a story other than being able to formulate tropable (is that a word lol) characters. Good ideas don't always translate into good stories. And engaging critically with the text you read is how we figure that out, how we make sure authors are giving us a good craft. Writing is a form of entertainment too, and just like we'd do a poorly crafted show, we should always be questioning the things we read, even if we enjoy those things.

It's just werd to see people argue that we shouldn't read literature unless we know for certain we are going to like it. Or seeing people not be able to stand honest criticism of the world they've fallen in love with. I love ASOIAF -- but boy oh boy are there a lot of problems in the story: racial undertones, questionable writing decisions, weird ness overall. I also think engaging critically helps us understand how an author's biases can inform what they write. Like, HP Lovecraft wrote eerie stories, he was also a raging racist. But we can argue that his fear of PoC, his antisemitism, and all of his weird fears informed a lot of what he was writing. His writing is so eerie because a lot of that fear comes from very real, nasty places. It's not to say we have to censor his works, but he influences a lot of horror today and those fears, that racial undertone, it is still very prevalent in horror movies today. That fear of the 'unknown,'

Gone with the Wind is an incredibly racist book. It's also a well-written book. I think a lot of people also like confine criticism to just a syntax/prose/technical level -- when in reality criticism should also be applied on an ideological level. Books that are well-written, well-plotted, etc., are also -- and should also -- be up for criticism. A book can be very well-written and also propagate harmful ideologies. I often read books that I know that (on an ideological level), I might not agree with. We can learn a lot from the books we read, even the ones we hate.

I just feel like we're getting to the point where people are just telling people to 'shut up and read' and making spaces for conversation a uniform experience. I don't want to be in a space where everyone agrees with the same point. Either people won't accept criticism of their favorite book, or they think criticism shouldn't be applied to books they think are well written. Reading invokes natural criticism -- so does writing. That's literally what writing is; asking questions, interrogating the world around you. It's why we have literary devices, techniques, and elements. It's never just taking the words being printed at face value.

You can identify with a character's trauma and still understand that their badly written. You can read a story, hate everything about it, and still like a character. As I stated a while back, I'm reading Fourth Wing; the book is terrible, but I like the main character. The worldbuilding is also terrible, but the author writes her PoC characters with respect. It's not hard to acknowledge one thing about the text, and still find enough to enjoy the book. And authors grow when we're honest about what worked and what didn't work. Shadow and Bone was very formulaic and derivative at points, but Six of Crows is much more inventive and inclusive. Veronica Roth's Carve the Mark had some weird racial problems, but Chosen Ones was a much better book in terms of representation. Percy Jackson is the same way. These writers grow, not just by virtue of time, but because they were critiqued and listened to that critique. C.S. Lewis and Tolkien always publically criticized each other's work. Zora Neale Hurston and Langston Hughes had a legendary friendship and back and forth with one another's works which provides so much insight into the conversations black authors and creatives were having.

Writing has always been about asking questions; prodding here and there, critiquing. It has always been a conversation, a dialogue. I urge people to love what they read, and read what they love, but always ask questions, always understand different perspectives, and always keep your mind open. Please stop stifling and controlling the conversations about your favorite literature, and please understand that everyone will not come out with the same reading experience as you. It doesn't make their experience any less valid than yours.

[hylianane]

And when OPLA calls back to Zeff telling the crew to read stories to Zoro so he can hear their voices and recover faster, by having Sanji sit by his bedside on Thriller Bark and read him a book about the All Blue. What will you do then?

[sexyleon]

Dracula has been my favourite novel for just under two decades and I have reread it multiple times throughout the years, but nothing compares to the experience of @re-dracula . Something about hearing the voices of all the characters, experiencing the horror as it happened to them, is more chilling, more compelling, and more terrifying than any other reading experience. Nothing is filled in and nothing is cut out. It’s a 1:1 adaptation that places you between predator and prey. The voice acting, the sound design, the pacing— all of it lends itself to a completely immersive experience that transforms Dracula from a silly little vampire story into a fundamentally horrifying tale.

Anyways, you can listen to Re: Dracula here.

[hanafubukki]

I’ve been thinking and wondering 🤔 if they do increase Lilia’s life span, it’s probably not going to be hundreds of years. It will probably be longer but not as long as that (though I wish it were, because I know he wanted to see Malleus become king, etc)

So then if they do increase it, or maybe the years he has left is less than a hundred years, but as Malleus said; Lilia doesn’t want any one of them wasting their time on him when they could be living their life to the fullest.

In either case, wouldn’t it be heart breaking and yet poetic, for Lilia and Silver to have lived their life and then died at the same time? 🤔

Though if that’s the case, I wouldn’t be able to be as strong as Malleus, because loosing my father and brother at the same time?? That would break me if I was in his shoes 💔😭

You can also imagine the heartbreak Sebek would go through if his aging slowed down too you know? The pain he would feel.

But then, it also makes me wonder 🤔, it could also be half a century or the “remainder” of human years.

Because the whole point of his actions is that Lilia wants his sons to move on, to enjoy life, make bonds, and be happy. See life to the fullest as he has, enjoy life with the same joy his boys has brought him. He wants the same for them 🥹

In the end, it might just be that. Lilia living like a “human” seeing his boys grow and become the fine men they are and being proud of them all the while.

As any parent would.

Because isn’t that a parent’s wish? To see their children grow up, see them come into their own, know they will be fine, and once the time comes, they can happily pass with a smile. 🥹😭💞

[vic-does-battlecats]

Minor spoilers for the already revealed chapters of the next A Starless Clan book Wind

[skywalkr-nberrie]

Anakin’s love and marriage to Padmé wasn’t the issue of why he fell to the dark side. He was already being groomed by Palpatine in becoming his apprentice, and Padmé not being there wouldn’t have changed that. She just made it easier. Anakin was born a slave, which doesn’t leave him in the right headspace, and ever since Shmi died, Anakin became more unstable. Inevitably, he became more obsessed with control and wanting the power to stop the ones he loves from dying. Had Padmé not been in his life, Anakin still would have fallen due to Palpatine’s manipulations and topped with the Jedi’s mistreatment of Anakin. The Jedi and even OW failed Anakin in a way where Anakin came to a point where he doubts their faith in him, and he in return loses his trust him them. He says so himself in the ROTS novel. None of that had anything to do with Padmé.

But to insinuate that Anakin only cared for gaining “power” and essentially his “greed” is to blame for his actions, is super reductive understanding of his character. Yes, Anakin was greedy for control, and power. But not because he’s power hungry and wants to rule the galaxy. He only ever wanted more power to keep his loved ones safe, to assume control over what happens to him. (and this would’ve happened even if he and Padmé weren’t together.) saying that if Anakin “truly cared about saving his wife”, he would have told OW or any of the masters about his situation but didn’t because he was “greedy” is again, incorrect. Because Anakin DID go to the Jedi for advice. He talked to Yoda. Anakin put his faith into the Jedi but they didn’t exactly lead him down the path he needed.

Doubled with the fact that he knows the Council doesn’t trust him, and him not being sure he can trust them, (yes, including OW.) this led him to seeking answers in other and more dangerous places. Which was Palpatine. Whom Anakin is already vulnerable to and was being groomed by. Anakin’s fall to the darkside was due to his desperation and desire to save his wife, the love of his life. Not because he was greedy for more power and that he didn’t truly care about saving Padmé. That’s just a bad analysis of his character, intentions, and motivations. Anakin only became obsessed with the idea of “gaining power to rule and obtain authority” happened AFTER he fell. And that’s because the darkside plays with your sanity like that, makes you want and do things you normally wouldn’t do or want.

The main point is: Anakin’s fall doesn’t stem from his greed for wanting power because he seeks heroism, status, and authority. It was out of genuine love and desperation for his wife. Then again, his marriage to Padmé also isn’t to blame for his fall, because that was due to Anakin’s own fear of loss and abandonment. He would’ve fallen under any circumstance, with how unstable, vulnerable, and manipulated he was. That was the tragedy. He was always doomed to fall.

[padfoot-lupin77]

To all the people that don’t read books/ obsess over shows and movies / make scenarios of fictional characters in their heads / have maladaptive daydreaming: what exactly goes through that head of yours? Is it, like, empty space? Is it quiet? Is there just more room for anxiety?

[samglyph]

I didn’t tag anything on the post cause I didn’t want to detract from that whole thing but everyone just needs to remember that I do have a giddy obsession with The King in Yellow. Not the malevolent character. The book. From 1895. The one that starts with the author trying to justify segregation before going into his state authorized suicide world. That one. I do a little jig whenever I hold it my brain is broken about this book.

[apollo18]

Concept: the justice league finds out that Blaze and Satanus, the rulers of hell, are kids of their ‘even more of a boy scout than Superman’ coworker’s “boss” and think Shazam is the Christian God. They ask Billy really vague questions that lead Billy into confusing them even more and they become convinced that Marvel’s Wizard guy is God with a capital G and Marvel’s either an angel or the second coming of Jesus.

Meanwhile Shazam doesn’t even know what the Bible is and his knowledge about religion is so outdated he still thinks Solomon’s Judaism is new age and not worth his time to research such a ‘fad’ religion, but he knows humans will make a religion out of anything as well as bastardize existing ones and very well could have mixed up actual tales that involve him, his allies, and his children into some sort of melting pot of a religion.

So when someone finally asks Marvel outright if his “boss” is God, Billy goes ‘wait… old guy in white robes and sandals, with long white hair and a beard… lives in space… aka the “heavens”, whose a ghost(Holy Spirit), and knows everything(historama)??? I need to dig deeper into this hold on guys’ and goes off to ask the wizard.

So when Billy asks the Wizard he just tells Billy “well, my boy, if so many things match up, maybe it is so and the tales of myself and my champions grew so estranged from their origins or mixed in with other beliefs that it can explain the things that aren’t true to our reality.”

Then The Canonical Character To The DC Universe, Jesus of Nazareth, shows up.

[easypeezysilverbreezey]

ivypool they will never ever make me hate you. god forbid a traumatized mentally ill woman behaves in a way that isn’t woobifiable to you :/