#it’s just slightly boring at times

[melloneah]

slightly disappointed in the new billie eilish album

[lafemmemacabre]

That's it. I'm sick of algorithms recommending me music I always at best go "meh" at, but usually nearly hate.

Tbh I don't even like the recs from most fellow goths right now because everyone's obsessed with the She Past Away style of Darkwave that's become inescapable and its 984784764 clones (derogatory, about to commit crimes about it).

From now on, I'm exclusively discovering new music from users on Last.fm whose compatibility with me ranks as "super". No one else has decent taste.

[teachmetokill]

[thwackk]

people underestimate the comedic potential of eobard’s existence and his extreme petty hatred for this one (1) dude

bonus because i just feel like barry would think he’s just hallucinating or something but came up with the WORST way to tell his mom that

[marclef]

hello there friends, tonight i present a very special gift to you......

it's the only Peppino clone i've never caused any harm to come to!! take him, he's yours now.

now be gentle with him, he's seen a lot. you wouldn't let anything bad happen to him.............. would you?

[torgawl]

i was a reading a bit more on purgatory and purgatorius ignis (cleansing fire), which is a concept that existed even before the notion that purgatory itself was a third other-world domain, similar to heaven and hell, when i suddenly remembered dante's la divina commedia and decided to revisit the story a little. and i found something interesting as i was scrolling through the wikipedia page.

so, purgatory is the second part of la divina commedia, following inferno, and is an allegory telling of the climb of dante up the mount of purgatory, guided by the roman poet virgil. alegorically, purgatorio represents the penitent christian life (and christianity, as we know, is one of the core themes of fontaine's archon quests that arlecchino was a part of). while describing the climb dante focuses a lot on the nature of sin, examples of vice and virtue, as well as moral issues in politics and in the church. what's interesting, though, is that the poem posits the theory that all sins arise from love – either perverted love directed towards others' harm, or deficient love, or the disordered or excessive love of good things.

why is this interesting, you ask? let me add here a few quotes before i contextualise it:

"she is a god with no love left for her people, nor do they have any left for her" - dainsleif about the cryo archon, the tsaritsa

"her royal highness the tsaritsa is actually a gentle soul. too gentle, in fact, and that's why she had to harden herself. likewise, she declared war against the whole world only because she dreams of peace. and because she made an enemy of the world, i now have a friend in you." - childe about the tsaritsa

"everyone praises her for her kindness and benevolence, but they forget that love is also a form of sin. what if she's just trying to compensate for something?" - wanderer about the tsaritsa

the tsaritsa, the cryo archon and the person arlecchino is devoted to, is theorised and hinted multiples times to be the god of love. yes, the love that is said to be the origin of sin in la divina commedia. we can also draw parallels between the idea of perverted love talked about in the poem and the relationship between arlecchino and others, for instance the kids of the house of the hearth.

arlecchino's drip marketing including an excerpt where the scene goes from a gentle warm environment, seemingly mistaken as a loving family home full of innocent looking children, that quickly shifts into a somber and dark atmosphere under her authority - the children answering instantly, without hesitation and completely obedient -, is the perfect illustration of the duality within her character. there's an obvious exploitative and manipulative system making use of the house of the hearth and the orphans under its roof, where arlecchino (as the one running the orphanage) is the provider and the kids are brought up to be dependable and further dispatched as fatui soldiers when "potential" is recognised. and we can deduce that there's ways that their education is done from a very young age so it prevents or punishes any sort of dissent, something not hard to imagine when we know from freminet that arlecchino doesn't like when the kids cry or show emotional vulnerability, something she sees as weakness, for example. but if there's this dark side to her, there's also certain attitudes that demonstrate her care for the children or even her care for the world around her. arlecchino helping freminet get closure on his mother's death, the reformation of the house of the hearth (which we know used to have a much more punishitive and strict leader before arlecchino took over) or even her devotion and deep respect towards the tsaritsa are some examples of the way she shows care for other people. now, we can theorise that these good deeds directed towards the orphans under her care are very much purposeful to better manipulate them, but i think that's exactly what the notion of perverted love in la divina commedia tries to hint at.

besides this concept, there's something else that peaked my interest in dante's poem. dante pictures purgatory as an island at the antipodes of jerusalem, pushed up, in an otherwise empty sea, by the displacement caused by the fall of satan, which left him fixed at the central point of the earth. it's a cone-shaped island that has seven terraces on which souls are cleansed from the seven deadly sins or capital vices as they ascend. at the summit is the garden of eden, from where the souls, cleansed of evil tendencies and made perfect, are taken to heaven.

as we know, arlecchino is being introduced in fontaine, her homeland, and the idea of purgatory as an island in the sea leading its way to heaven caused by the fall of a sinful being sort of reminded me of remuria. remuria was the civilization in fontaine which directly preceded the previous hydro archon egeria's rule. its downfall occurred as a result of remus' attempt to avert its predicted destruction, and in particular, by his act of sharing his power and authority — reserved only for gods — with the four human harmosts he appointed to govern his cities. remuria eventually ended up being sunken into the abyss, devouring everything including the people and remus himself. we know there's still a region in fontaine's map that wasn't yet released, so how odd would it be that the last part to be revealed in fontaine might just be the land that was once sunken? after the little note about the samsara cycles near the tower of the narzissenkreuz ordo, which referenced a cycle called remuria, i would not be surprised at all. it's also particularly funny that fontaine is directly below celestia. yes, the floating island in the sky above teyvat which is the residence of the gods, the same gods that made remuria fall. as the contemporary philosophers of our time have said, that's sus!!!

i don't want to get too ahead of myself because i don't have a theory about what's going to happen or what role arlecchino will play exactly but i don't think it would be shocking if we got to know more about remuria during her release. and still in the purgatory idea, i think the angel of death (azreal) might be an interesting parallel to make with arlecchino. azrael's role is seen as benevolent, transporting souls after death. it fits perfectly well with the idea of purgatorius ignis, that signifies transformation. in different cultural and religious contexts, fire can also symbolize destruction renewal and even rebirth so i'm very very curious to see what arlecchino's story will be like.

[simplywarriors]

reading warrior cats (especially male pov’s) is genuinely the hardest thing ever simply because all of them follow this loner plot line that put them in a mental position that no one understands them or everyone it out for them when the books then only present people being kind to them. like w/ brambleclaw his obsession w/ thinking everyone sees him as his dad is proved by nothing but his own thoughts. lionblaze’s power (before it’s revealed) is seen as an awesome and cool thing and lionblaze has always been complimented for his fighting skills but thinks of himself as an outcast when he never is. jayfeather is increasingly mean to anyone and everyone and yet chatacters always just roll their eyes playfully and i can name several characters who are all close with him. our newest example, flamepaw/nightheart, fits perfectly when he has constant turmoil over how everyone treats him when everyone around him treats him exceptionally well. the only male characters i can think of who actually fits the “everyone is out to get me which affects my personality and judgements” that actually make sense are onestar and shadowsight.

[superbellsubways]

killing anyone who made fun of or straight up just hated Tabitha's redesign in ORAS btw.. hes cute i hate all of you why do you hate fat people

[birdmenmanga]

@raventhekittycat

hi okay so I've been mulling this one over for the past day or two and I think I have the answer. not to be using hamburger to explain anything to an american but you're my detco mutual so I'm going to try and explain it in detco terms

There's a post going around recently about how if you've read detco and only detco, the first time hakuba shows up you're going to be totally flummoxed, because damn this guy is clearly important, he gets to be even cooler than Shinichi, he's got a half-page shot of him (in such a panel-dense series such as Detective Conan, no less!!) and he's got a fucking hawk. he's CLEARLY important. everything about the narrative is indicating that you need to PAY ATTENTION to hakuba and that he's the coolest guy and he's important!!!! and then he dies in the case lol (not for real. but still.)!! and you're like huh??? what was that. why did aoyama do that.

But with the context of magic kaito this totally makes sense. He's a beloved character that people have been waiting decades to see again. Of course Aoyama is going to hype him up!! It's his big moment after years of being locked in the backrooms!!!

Anyways reading birdmen for me was kind of like that. The author's previous series, Kekkaishi, was pretty one-dimensional at the beginning, and even after the main plot started picking up at around volume 6, it still felt quite understandable. I knew what she was trying to get at, and the spectacular job she did with the anthropocene and climate change metaphor towards the end of that series really made me interested in the rest of her works. That and the way she writes familial relationships is absolutely DEVASTATING. (I mean this with the highest of praise)

But when I read BIRDMEN for the first time, I was probably in... middle school, maybe? And I read it, sure, but I didn't get it. I could see what was literally happening on the page but the narrative choices were absolutely baffling at times. Why skip over the entire part of the plot where they figure out who the birdman that saved them was? She blatantly doesn't care about that. What does she care about then?? I knew I didn't get it, I knew there were parts of it that were important and I couldn't figure out why and THAT'S how it dug its pretty little claws into me. Even after I finished catching up it nagged at me a little bit, not often at all, but enough that every once in a while I go, huh, right, that was a thing, let me go read it again.

For the record this type of story haunting has happened to me twice. First time was the Heart of Thomas, second time was BIRDMEN. I think the thing is that these are both stories which are not what other people say they are and I think I came into both of these stories with a misconception, trying to look too hard for things that weren't important and therefore missing the things that were.

Because sure, BIRDMEN is about mental illness. Yeah, it's about an evil scientific organization growing mutants in a lab. Yeah, it's about what it means to leave your humanity behind. That's all technically correct, on a surface level, and the fandom at large likely agrees with these takes for the most part, but in my opinion none of that really delves into what the thematic messaging of the story is about.

There are cryptic conversations about authority and human extinction and peculiar outfit and ability choices. You can tell these choices weren't made to serve the purpose of "writing exciting shonen manga" because that was what she did for the most part in Kekkaishi and you can tell she wasn't putting her whole pussy into doing that here. So what was she doing? What's like. All of this. Waves my hands at this.

The short answer is that it's really about the interplay between capitalism (represented by humanity) and communism (represented by birdmen), and explores the role institutional white supremacy (EDEN) plays in enforcing capitalism. It is ALSO about queer liberation and the importance of community, but hey, that double-stacks conveniently with the communism metaphor.

But also take this opinion of mine with a grain of salt. As far as I know I'm the only one who really truly deeply believes that it is not only AN interpretation of the work, but one that was fully intended by the author.

So basically, I like it, because I think it says something true and beautiful that I also believe in, even if I didn't have the words for it the first time I read it. But I don't really think that's what people really look for in a media recommendation.

Do I like it? Yes, I love it. Will I recommend it to others? Yeah, sure. But do I think it's deeply flawed? Yeah, absolutely. It's flawed in the same ways as The Witch from Mercury— a rushed ending, too many threads that were opened and never tied together. The pacing and characterization is perfect in the beginning, and too rushed at the end. There are prerequisites you basically HAVE to read in order to understand the story (tempest for G-Witch and the communist manifesto for birdmen). I think a truly good story wouldn't have any of these things so if people don't like it I never blame them.

It's my personal experiences that make birdmen so profound to me. If you are not queer I just don't think Eishi coming out as a birdman to his mom will hit the same, just as an example. Sorry that I wasn't the kid you wanted me to be. I know you love me and you just want the best for me and that's why you're so controlling, because you think I can be saved by conforming to societal expectations. But I can't live like that. I can't be like that. And that's why I must go. etc.

Aesthetically I do love birdmen a lot. If I had to describe it in a few words it would probably be "chilling", "beautiful", and "powerful", which nicely coincides with the type of things I personally like to draw. It's also silly to a small degree but it's so serious and I know Tanabe can be way way way funnier (read kekkaishi for this. kekkaishi and hanazakari no kimitachi he were foundational to my sense of sequential art humor) so that's not really the standout trait of this series.

I can't let it go because I'm chewing this series like a bone. And it's taking me years but I am getting that sweet sweet marrow. By god. We are on year 3 of this shit and I am GOING to understand this series. and I'm going to make 3 video essays about it

[starbuck]

My new favorite activity is scrolling through the black sails tag and commenting my interpretations on random people’s posts and they’re like “wtf are you talking about?” and i’m like 👍🏻

[shuploc]

May I request more Viktor? Please?

Of course you may!

I must admit, I've had a little bit of a Viktor itch I've been wanting to scratch, but I've also been insanely busy and prioritizing Miguel stuff whenever I've had free-time. Perhaps a little Viktor piece is in order sometime soon 🤗

[stinkrascal]

that scene in the grove when you first meet wyll and hes being so nice and sweet and patient with the little tiefling child like okaywhat if i killed everyone and then myself right now. what if i sustained myself on a diet of glass and mercury alone.what then

[iceeericeee]

I wonder how many tags i can add on to this

[stuck-in-the-ghost-zone]

from your liveblogging posts, all I can deduce about Tokyo Ghoul is that it makes little sense, and rewatching it isn't helping

dude season 3 took an insane turn i wasnt expecting and now im so confused. people that were trying to kill each other at the end of season 2 are now besties. my boy has amnesia (?) and is now working for the army/government/whatever. nobody is acknowledging the fact that he looks almost exactly the same. do they know?!?!?!?!?! do i know?!?!?!?!?! he sure doesnt!!!! i have no idea.

[nellie-elizabeth]

Some whining about fan responses to GO2 below the cut. I'm just being a jerk mostly lol.

Not gonna tag or link the posts because I'm not trying to stir shit but I see some people doing the thing for Good Omens season 2 that people did for Sherlock or Supernatural where, they didn't really like some aspects of season 2, and instead of saying "oh, that part didn't really gel with me" they think "Oh, it's actually all part of a long con that Neil Gaiman is playing on us! The stuff that I thought was bad? It was bad on purpose!" (Remember, the secret final episode of Sherlock, or the fact that the penultimate Supernatural episode was "bad on purpose" so the finale would fix it all?)

And it's so frustrating because I think these people are setting themselves up for further disappointment when season three comes. I personally loved season two of good omens! It really hit the spot for me, I thought it was funny and charming and clever and perfectly heartbreaking. If you didn't like it, that's okay, you don't have to construct a whole conspiracy theory around "why it was bad".

I want to be clear i don't mean just having theories about potential mysteries/clues leading to season 3. What are the Metatron's real motivations? Will we get to know who Crowley was as an angel before the fall? That sort of stuff is fun to speculate about, and we certainly don't have all the answers!

What I'm talking about things like... I saw someone say that the Eccles Cakes were a secret clue: why bring them up and put such emphasis on them only for them not to get eaten, hmmm? That couldn't have been just a simple oversight... it must be a grander point about the secret undercurrent plot that's been hiding right in front of our eyes this whole time.

And... no, it's not a simple oversight. It's not a grand clue to a big mystery (imo) either. It's pretty basic storytelling. Aziraphale asks Nina for something that calms people down, he procures the Eccles cakes on her recommendation, and then hands them off to Crowley as they enter the shop. There's a pointed shot of the uneaten cookies as Crowley storms off because, guess what, nobody ate them, and nobody's calming down! I think that's it, y'all. No grand mystery to parse here.

Or one thing I saw that really had me scratching my head was "why did we spend so long in the '40s minisode seeing Aziraphale pick out magic tricks in the shop, do the whole fake-out with the bullets, etc.? What was the point of showing us all that?"

I mean... because it was funny and charming and good character development? I don't know that it was leading to any grand secret behind the scenes. The setup and the pay-off is all right there in the 1940's flashbacks. Aziraphale is bad at stage magic, and then real miracles are blocked, and in the moment of truth he's able to use trickery correctly, for once in his life. Crowley and Aziraphale both manage to keep each other safe in the human way, even when their miracles are blocked. It's all right there, it doesn't have to be a clue leading to some big switcharoo later down the road.

Or one last thing I saw was people saying "where were the Zombies? Why have a plot about digging up corpses, and another story about Zombies, what does it all mean?"

And like... I don't know, maybe it means some Secret Extra Thing that i just haven't seen yet, but isn't it also possible that it means... thematic foreshadowing of season three's external plot? You've got Job's children being "reborn", you've got corpses being dug up, you've got zombies roaming London. The third season is about the Second Coming, y'all. I don't want to say "it's not that deep" because it is that deep, it's not just... extra made up layers of obfuscation that give it unnecessary confusing deepness. If that makes sense.

Bottom line, if this season didn't gel with you, I'm sorry! But I promise you, you're setting yourself up for disappointment if you spend the next couple years divining all the secret codes Gaiman put into the work for you. He didn't write a "bad on purpose" season of television. He wrote a good season of television! I'm sure there are mysteries to unravel, and fun clues to go back and find later on when we see how it all ends up. But he didn't write an entire season of TV to be a big giant misdirect in and of itself. I really don't think that's how this works.

End of soap box.

[serendipitous-mage]

its the Good Kush she got it at the dollar store :3