at some point it's just like. do they even fucking like the thing they're asking AI to make? "oh we'll just use AI for all the scripts" "we'll just use AI for art" "no worries AI can write this book" "oh, AI could easily design this"
like... it's so clear they've never stood in the middle of an art museum and felt like crying, looking at a piece that somehow cuts into your marrow even though the artist and you are separated by space and time. they've never looked at a poem - once, twice, three times - just because the words feel like a fired gun, something too-close, clanging behind your eyes. they've never gotten to the end of the movie and had to arrive, blinking, back into their body, laughing a little because they were holding their breath without realizing.
"oh AI can mimic style" "AI can mimic emotion" "AI can mimic you and your job is almost gone, kid."
... how do i explain to you - you can make AI that does a perfect job of imitating me. you could disseminate it through the entire world and make so much money, using my works and my ideas and my everything.
and i'd still keep writing.
i don't know there's a word for it. in high school, we become aware that the way we feel about our artform is a cliche - it's like breathing. over and over, artists all feel the same thing. "i write because i need to" and "my music is how i speak" and "i make art because it's either that or i stop existing." it is such a common experience, the violence and immediacy we mean behind it is like breathing to me - comes out like a useless understatement. it's a cliche because we all feel it, not because the experience isn't actually persistent. so many of us have this ... fluttering urgency behind our ribs.
i'm not doing it for the money. for a star on the ground in some city i've never visited. i am doing it because when i was seven i started taking notebooks with me on walks. i am doing it because in second grade i wrote a poem and stood up in front of my whole class to read it out while i shook with nerves. i am doing it because i spent high school scribbling all my feelings down. i am doing it for the 16 year old me and the 18 year old me and the today-me, how we can never put the pen down. you can take me down to a subatomic layer, eviscerate me - and never find the source of it; it is of me. when i was 19 i named this blog inkskinned because i was dramatic and lonely and it felt like the only thing that was actually permanently-true about me was that this is what is inside of me, that the words come up over everything, coat everything, bloom their little twilight arias into every nook and corner and alley
"we're gonna replace you". that is okay. you think that i am writing to fill a space. that someone said JOB OPENING: Writer Needed, and i wrote to answer. you think one raindrop replaces another, and i think they're both just falling. you think art has a place, that is simply arrives on walls when it is needed, that is only ever on demand, perfect, easily requested. you see "audience spending" and "marketability" and "multi-line merch opportunity"
and i see a kid drowning. i am writing to make her a boat. i am writing because what used to be a river raft has long become a fully-rigged ship. i am writing because you can fucking rip this out of my cold dead clammy hands and i will still come back as a ghost and i will still be penning poems about it.
it isn't even love. the word we use the most i think is "passion". devotion, obsession, necessity. my favorite little fact about the magic of artists - "abracadabra" means i create as i speak. we make because it sluices out of us. because we look down and our hands are somehow already busy. because it was the first thing we knew and it is our backbone and heartbreak and everything. because we have given up well-paying jobs and a "real life" and the approval of our parents. we create because - the cliche again. it's like breathing. we create because we must.
you create because you're greedy.
18K notes
·
View notes
TVs and monitors are separate species with common features, but which features these are have drastically changed over time. the two used to be similar sizes with very similar behaviour, and were differentiated primarily by which connection ports they had.
over time, their courses of evolution brought them closer together in that regard, with both species' survival becoming contingent on how well they could digest HDMI. as their analogue prey, such as VGA and Component, died out, the two display species were faced with the same choice: adapt, or die.
despite this newfound similarity, though, the two species still fill different ecological niches, and the way they adapted to these new environmental situations resulted in further physical distinction in other areas. for example, it is now almost impossible to find a modern TV that is a comparable size to a monitor; while the modern monitor is still limited in dimensions by the desktops where it prefers to nest, the modern TV has an almost unbounded adult size.
another strange new differentiation is that the TV seems to have developed a dependence on internet connectivity and software updates. while this benefits them in the short term, having more selling points than a monitor at first glance, it is working against them in the long-term, with each one's effective lifespan being cut dramatically.
the "dumb TV" that, quite intelligently, does not have any big software features, is nearing extinction, with very few members still producing offspring. and while we may feel sorrow for these displays, it is only natural that they are dying off - they are simply being outcompeted by the once-humble monitor. at the same size, and without the advantage of a wider variety of ports, the dumb TV cannot keep up with the monitor's much more refined adaptations for the same niche.
however, one mystery remains: why did the dumb TV never grow to the same impressive dimensions as its smart siblings? some observations suggests that the larger smart TVs have become overly territorial as a result of their decreased longevity, to the point that they will kill an infant dumb TV if they feel that it could grow to compete with them. it seems cruel to us, but in the wild, it's all a matter of survival. if you win the evolutionary race - you fight to keep first place.
1K notes
·
View notes
yknow solas from dai right and forgive me bc im sure other ppl already knew this but i just found out about this just now and now i have to say it
so i was scrolling reddit and someone was asking how come they can't seem to write solas dialogue correctly for fanfiction and someone in the comments pointed out that he, not always, but very often, speaks in IAMBIC TETRAMETER? and that's why he SOUNDS LIKE THAT?
2K notes
·
View notes
It's way funnier to me to imagine that Geralt is the one who desperately wants Dandelion to winter at Kaer Morhen with him but Dandelion keeps saying no on the simple grounds that it's too fucking cold and do you want me to die Geralt? Do you want me to get hypothermia and fucking die?
And Geralt's like "please I am begging on my knees I will cuddle you every night to keep you warm I just need to prove you actually exist"
938 notes
·
View notes
I actually think Dorian and Orym should fight more.
Remember when their slowly building tension over and entire episode (full of passive aggressive remarks and blame throwing) led to threats? And how after, Orym thanked Dorian for handing over the crown sadly because he knew Dorian would be mad at him? And Dorian couldn't even look at him because he was legitimately hurt, thinking Orym was disappointed in him for doing what he thought was right? That was peak.
The fact they went from that to their current closeness and trust is the best part of their entire dynamic. Their relationship was hard fought and still will be. They will fight for it because they respect and care for one another deeply, and their disagreements don't change that, only improve it.
315 notes
·
View notes