when reading scripture or religious texts in my studies from a variety of religions (a not-insignificant part of my education has been religious studies) i can appreciate and understand the beauty and appeal of it and make sense of its internal logic system and worldview and feel that i'm picking up what it's putting down even if i don't necessarily identify with it on a personal level, but i gotta be honest i always feel like i'm missing something or losing my mind when i read christian texts like i don't get it and it doesn't make sense to me and nothing about the trinity makes sense to me and the entire worldview feels so harsh and terrifying and bleak for no reason and every time i've asked anyone in my family (on the christian side) to explain any of it to me like sincerely i just feel more baffled and whenever i've had to read passages of the new testament i dont get it at all like even abstractly i don't understand and it makes me feel crazy like what i'm looking at has to be completely different from what other people are seeing and i don't mean it in a reddit atheist smug asshole way like it's genuinely beyond my comprehension I Don't Get It and i don't think i ever will
50 notes
·
View notes
It makes me a little sad to see the fans of different iterations of the turtles fight with each other about which is the best when, really, as a franchise that started off as a parody of Daredevil - each version seems to me to be a reflection of what superhero tropes were popular at the time. It went from a dark riff on Marvel comics, to the goofy Saturday morning cartoons from the 80s, skipping ahead to 2012 which took itself more seriously as a band of crime-fighting ninjas (while not abandoning the comedy altogether), to Rise - the chaotic, clearly anime-inspired show, with the focus really being on family dynamics. Whatever was cool or popular at the time of each version's inception is the basis for each one's storytelling - a condensing of culture at the time.
101 notes
·
View notes
see the thing that gets me about the human centipede is that you're either a normie going to watch a movie and getting scared over nothing of you're a freak whos going like WHAT'S ALL THIS THEN?! and like both can backfire bc i cannot stress enough The Human Centipede is such a stupidly tame movie there's barely any blood at all but thing is what makes me be SO insane about it it's that Heiter's actor May He Rest In Peace just put his WHOLE PUSSY into playing him making it such a fucking enjoyable and hilarious movie.
Like you cannot go watch the human centipede first sequence expecting to be scared bc you'll get bored in the first 40 minutes of doomed yuri but you gotta embrace the sheer campiness of it. Nobody cares about the campiness bro. He makes chicken sounds. He makes horrible silly chicken noises. Are you listening to me.
2 notes
·
View notes
Oh i thought because you like ancient Greek mythology you would like neoclassicism. But of course it's not the same because the ancient Greek marbles were extraordinary and inspired the neoclassicism which was European but unfortunately Greeks were participated in this :(
I think the question was what I find interesting, not what I like. I like a lot of things that I don't find interesting, and lot of things I don't like catch my interest.
however, I did include neoclassicism in my answer, as partly overlapping/ being included in academic art, but not because of its rather superficial relation to ancient greek mythology or ancient greece. I really like observing the skill and knowledge it showcases, so that's why it is interesting to me.
I like a lot of ancient greek art in the same way that I like all art, that is to say, sometimes because of the concept (be is something funny or unique etc) , sometimes because it's stylized in a way that I enjoy, sometimes because I admire the skill, and sometimes because it's showing me something interesting, like pottery drawings that show mundane every day things.
The vast majority of art we have from anceint greece as a whole isn't like hermes of praxiteles or the doryphoros or any other masterpiece. Masterpieces were and still are few and far between, in general. Drawing and painting in europe after the rennaisance was miles ahead of ancient greek drawing and painting in terms of skill.
I don't see anything particularly extraordinary about ancient greek sculpture specifically, the same type of masterpieces were made in rome later, in the rennaisance and even nowadays, whenever artists had enough resources and the overall art climate was leaning towards more realistic renderings. The artists back then and the artists now are the same type of human. It so happened that in an area with excellent climate, wealth sources such as silver mines and overseas trade and a frankly huge amount of easily available marble, as well as political and social curcumstances that nurished the arts, this type of sculpture was developed and flourished, but drawing on centuries of experience, and prior influence from the monumental works of the ancient egyptians, at the very beginning.
that's all to say that I don't think it's good to have an idealised idea of ancient greek art and we need to shake that way of thinking off asap. We must go to a museum and look at all the things, not just the 2 famous, exceptional exhibits, if we want to talk about an entire culture's (or often, slightly different sub culutures included in the same overall category) artwork. That pottery piece with the funny hoplite owl means so much more to me than the aphrodite of melos, who I frankly neither like as an art piece nor care about (and that's fine because we all have our completely subjective preferences for art), and the overwhelming majority of art from minoan to hellenistic times leans more towards the first in terms of what I would call measurable skill for lack of a better word.
TL:DR
That's an inexcusably long rant form my part to say that I don't think the neoclassical masterpieces were in any objective way infrerior to the masterpieces from the 5th or 4th century bce.
PS There's a lot that's been said and can be said about the west's greek-excluding perception of ancient greece so i won't get into that now.
9 notes
·
View notes
i think one thing that anti-theists like.. do wrong (?) is treat religions like they're monoliths, which is impossible. you might find that one denomination is larger than another, but there will pretty much always be other denominations, and varying interpretations within each denomination.
no religion is a monolith, and no religion ever will be one. that's because religion is a personal experience to the individual, who will have their own thoughts and feelings about their faith. that is how people are in regards to everything, because humans aren't a monolith of a species.
i understand it might be confusing, or even frustrating when a religion has many denominations and interpretations, but that doesn't work super well as a reason for wanting to rid of religion. in fact, just yesterday i was told by an anti-theist that 'ideally' the belief of magic would be rid of and traditional religion wouldn't change. i know for a fact that other anti-theists would disagree with that and present their own ideal outcome of anti-theism, because i often browse anti-theism tags to get an understanding of anti-theist beliefs (it's good practice to read up on some opposing opinions to get some standing ground! my dad taught me that.)
it is perfectly okay to be critical of religion, i myself am critical of some religious ideas from varying religions! but when you don't fully understand the religion you're criticizing, and you're getting your information from biased sources, or only reading about limited ideas then you don't have the information to accurately criticize any religion. the idea that all religions are strict monoliths is entirely false, and if someone believes that then their criticism isn't totally credible, especially when they can't acknowledge the good of religion.
in the end, individual religions can not be treated as if they are massive groups of people who all share the same ideas and the same beliefs, harmful or not. because that's literally just not true. if you want to improve religion then actually go forth and try to understand it and listen to different people discuss their religion and it's flaws, trying to get rid of religion will only hurt people. (and i very strongly believe that getting rid of religion will in turn hurt spiritually, and by extension culture.)
12 notes
·
View notes