the thing about art is that it was always supposed to be about us, about the human-ness of us, the impossible and beautiful reality that we (for centuries) have stood still, transfixed by music. that we can close our eyes and cry about the same book passage; the events of which aren't real and never happened. theatre in shakespeare's time was as real as it is now; we all laugh at the same cue (pursued by bear), separated hundreds of years apart.
three years ago my housemates were jamming outdoors, just messing around with their instruments, mostly just making noise. our neighbors - shy, cautious, a little sheepish - sat down and started playing. i don't really know how it happened; i was somehow in charge of dancing, barefoot and laughing - but i looked up, and our yard was full of people. kids stacked on the shoulders of parents. old couples holding hands. someone had brought sidewalk chalk; our front walk became a riot of color. someone ran in with a flute and played the most astounding solo i've ever heard in my life, upright and wiggling, skipping as she did so. she only paused because the violin player was kicking his heels up and she was laughing too hard to continue.
two weeks ago my friend and i met in the basement of her apartment complex so she could work out a piece of choreography. we have a language barrier - i'm not as good at ASL as i'd like to be (i'm still learning!) so we communicate mostly through the notes app and this strange secret language of dancers - we have the same movement vocabulary. the two of us cracking jokes at each other, giggling. there were kids in the basement too, who had been playing soccer until we took up the far corner of the room. one by one they made their slow way over like feral cats - they laid down, belly-flat against the floor, just watching. my friend and i were not in tutus - we were in slouchy shirts and leggings and socks. nothing fancy. but when i asked the kids would you like to dance too? they were immediately on their feet and spinning. i love when people dance with abandon, the wild and leggy fervor of childhood. i think it is gorgeous.
their adults showed up eventually, and a few of them said hey, let's not bother the nice ladies. but they weren't bothering us, they were just having fun - so. a few of the adults started dancing awkwardly along, and then most of the adults. someone brought down a better sound system. someone opened a watermelon and started handing out slices. it was 8 PM on a tuesday and nothing about that day was particularly special; we might as well party.
one time i hosted a free "paint along party" and about 20 adults worked quietly while i taught them how to paint nessie. one time i taught community dance classes and so many people showed up we had to move the whole thing outside. we used chairs and coatracks to balance. one time i showed up to a random band playing in a random location, and the whole thing got packed so quickly we had to open every door and window in the place.
i don't think i can tell you how much people want to be making art and engaging with art. they want to, desperately. so many people would be stunning artists, but they are lied to and told from a very young age that art only matters if it is planned, purposeful, beautiful. that if you have an idea, you need to be able to express it perfectly. this is not true. you don't get only 1 chance to communicate. you can spend a lifetime trying to display exactly 1 thing you can never quite language. you can just express the "!!??!!!"-ing-ness of being alive; that is something none of us really have a full grasp on creating. and even when we can't make what we want - god, it feels fucking good to try. and even just enjoying other artists - art inherently rewards the act of participating.
i wasn't raised wealthy. whenever i make a post about art, someone inevitably says something along the lines of well some of us aren't that lucky. i am not lucky; i am dedicated. i have a chronic condition, my hands are constantly in pain. i am not neurotypical, nor was i raised safe. i worked 5-7 jobs while some of these memories happened. i chose art because it mattered to me more than anything on this fucking planet - i would work 80 hours a week just so i could afford to write in 3 of them.
and i am still telling you - if you are called to make art, you are called to the part of you that is human. you do not have to be good at it. you do not have to have enormous amounts of privilege. you can just... give yourself permission. you can just say i'm going to make something now and then - go out and make it. raquel it won't be good though that is okay, i don't make good things every time either. besides. who decides what good even is?
you weren't called to make something because you wanted it to be good, you were called to make something because it is a basic instinct. you were taught to judge its worth and over-value perfection. you are doing something impossible. a god's ability: from nothing springs creation.
a few months ago i found a piece of sidewalk chalk and started drawing. within an hour i had somehow collected a small classroom of young children. their adults often brought their own chalk. i looked up and about fifteen families had joined me from around the block. we drew scrangly unicorns and messed up flowers and one girl asked me to draw charizard. i am not good at drawing. i basically drew an orb with wings. you would have thought i drew her the mona lisa. she dragged her mother over and pointed and said look! look what she drew for me and, in the moment, i admit i flinched (sorry, i don't -). but the mother just grinned at me. he's beautiful. and then she sat down and started drawing.
someone took a picture of it. it was in the local newspaper. the summary underneath said joyful and spontaneous artwork from local artists springs up in public gallery. in the picture, a little girl covered in chalk dust has her head thrown back, delighted. laughing.
10K notes
·
View notes
According to NBC here in the US, the missing titanic sub has been found. As debris. Off the bow of the Titanic wreckage.
And it looks like the sub suffered what we all suspected, and what was undoubtedly the more merciful of the two options: a catastrophic implosion from the pressure.
Also, more info has come to light about the fishing trawler with the hundreds of migrants that sank cataclysmically off the coast of Greece, indicating that the greek coast guard knew about the vessel AND how much trouble the vessel was in, and were towing it at a speed that made it capsize, at which point they unhooked the tow line and watched the trawler sink without helping the passengers to safety. Despite a bunch of other ships trying to help as well throughout the whole ordeal.
So a lot of people are dead, all because of regulations (and the lack thereof) regarding sea-faring vessels and rescue protocols. People shouldnt be allowed to make a business charging a ton of money for a ride on an uncertified, unsafe, un-seaworthy ship going deep into the ocean with no distress beacon or tether to the mothership. People also shouldnt be allowed to enact laws that criminalize the ferrying of refugees, which then force the refugees to hitch rides on fishing trawlers, and which also prevent people from helping those fishing trawlers full of refugees due to fear of legal consequences.
Hopefully BOTH of these events spark changes on an international scale in terms of what is legally allowed to be sailed, who is legally allowed to be the passengers, and what the rescue protocols are in the event of disaster for any seafaring vessel, illegal or not. It shouldnt be just the global 1% who get 24/7 search parties and remote-operated submersibles helping rescue them.
12K notes
·
View notes
The journalists have been a problem since the screened but they’ve just gotten worse by sticking themselves into fandom discourse when they don’t need to be there at all. This is what one of them tweeted and it made me so angry:
https://x.com/kat__writes/status/1796683035514921368?s=46
https://x.com/kat__writes/status/1796683230629757217?s=46
because why are you speaking like this is an objective idea held by the whole fandom? countless fans loved the scene and loved bucktommy. If it didn’t resonate with some that doesn’t mean it’s objectively bad writing. I also cannot for the life of me understand how these scenes are being compared because in one, two of the guys are best friends not a couple and in the other, you have a canon couple and if a canon couple is talking to each other, obviously their flirting will be bold and outright and possibly sexual. The writers want us to know the couple is flirting. They don’t want us to dig deep for it in subtext. These are grown men in a relationship one of whom has been shown to very much enjoy sex and have a kinks already established. God forbid he flirt with his boyfriend and his boyfriend flirts with him beyond a little bat of the eyelashes.
yeah, that's not a journalist, that's a fan who happens to get paid to write about the show. and this is on her professional account? where she posts her actual interviews? babes no, that is literally why you have different personal and professional accounts. it doesn't need to be private/secret, but when you start putting your own biased opinions right next to what is supposed to be unbiased reporting, you lose credibility. if i can't trust you to separate your own feelings on a fucking twitter page then i can't trust you to do so in an interview.
the only people who have expressed an issue with the scene are ones who have found an issue with every aspect of tommy and bucktommy. not sorry, but i'm not listening to the opinions of people who have already decided they aren't going to like the scene before it happens, and can't even admit that.
37 notes
·
View notes
THIS WILL KILL ME, AND THEN I CAN STOP TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
Ever think. About how Uncle Ben, Robbie, perhaps even his parents, almost Aunt May, how all of them died (or got close to dying) in some way fighting for what they believed in? Is that noble? Or is it just cruel? Is there honor in not breaking that cycle, following that path down the road to some assured demise, or are you being stupid? At the least, there has to be some sanctity, comfort, in knowing how it will end. Teeth bared, you will not go down easy, but you will go.
Of course! Aren't these questions not at the center of peter’s story? His world kicks down at everything and everyone. Having beliefs to fight for and to keep you alive are what gets you killed. They’re all executed, Ben and Urich and Robbie. They go where they’re not wanted and get specifically targeted & killed because of it. The comic starts off telling the audience if you’re too loud, if you believe in something better, you’re not going to make it through the night. It starts off with Urich telling Pete to keep his head down, your anger will be the death of you, and Urich is right. But he himself changes later, believes too strongly in something better, and is killed because of that.
The question: is it noble? Is it cruel? Yes. The universe is set up in a positive feedback loop. To be noble is to stand up for what’s right. To be noble is to place a target on your back and to accept that your time has already started running out. But to lose your life or to lose a loved one will always be cruel. It’s cruel and it’s not right, so you need to make a stand.
Is it stupid to essentially walk head first into a loaded gun? I feel like the comic asks this question in Eyes Without a Face. It ends with hopelessness, MJ saying things will get better and Peter disagreeing, saying it’ll only get worse. Peter is aware of that feedback loop; he loses everyone because of who they represent and who they fight for. Sure there are decent people, he says, but it’s the decent people who look the other way and allow cruelties to keep unfolding so they can remain alive. That in itself answers the question, I think. Being decent isn’t being good. Letting horrors occur so you won’t die doesn’t seem honorable. But sometimes I suppose the question then leads to: is honor more important than necessity? Is it wrong to want to live?
There isn’t a follow up to Eyes Without a Face even though it sets up so much. Peter is staring this question right in the face. How do you keep fighting when it will only get you killed? How can you believe in anything? The world is full of decent people who look the other way, of awful people who create terror, of good people who get slaughtered. Why fight? Why be the spider-man? The next volume had so much it could have grappled with. Does Pete continue to get more ruthless? Kill all the wrongdoers in his path? How does straying from Aunt May's declaration that she can't live in a world where people kill each other like animals impact him? He's walking on a dangerous ledge. If you're not ruthless, corruption will save those in power. If you're too ruthless, its an easy path towards having people fear you just as much as they fear those you fight against. "Kill people like animals" and you've estranged yourself from the last family member you have. Have mercy and watch those that family member die. There is no easy way out! You're losing yourself no matter which way you step.
On a personal, character level, I think you're right. I feel like this fire in him that was lit by his late family and his mentors and the people he loved along the way isn't something he wants to give up, despite his horrific odds of making it out okay in the end. Its a way to connect with them, knowing that a piece of them can still live on, even if just through him. And in a world in such turmoil and uncertainty, it has to be a comfort to know that yeah, this is the life laid out for me. He will go down just like ben parker, just like ben urich, just like robbie robertson.
But his story is a tragedy in every way, isn't it. Funny how an impending death is a part of what connects him to his deceased loved ones, when the spider god is there right beyond the veil waiting to bring him back the moment he's been snuffed out. I wonder how he'll take that.
41 notes
·
View notes