is classified as a shitty new-age gift shop.
It’s small and it’s cramped and it’s located in one of those
seedy, almost-abandoned strip malls on the absolute wrong side of PCH—it shares
a mailbox with a discount beauty supply store and a Russian bakery that Draco’s
pretty sure is just a front for money laundering, and it always smells a tiny
bit like someone spilled a party-sized bottle of cheap domestic sherry on the
incense counter. There are Ikea shelves lined with dip-dyed crystals and
desert-scavenged fossilized scrub-brush, dusty triangular vials of essential
oils and papier-mâché plates inscribed with Celtic runes and medical-grade
glass jars filled with loose-leaf dried herbs; there are sandalwood spirit
boxes and polished teak rain-sticks and knock-off Inuit dream catchers and a
disturbing number of animal skeletons, too, bronze cauldrons and gold needles
and multi-packs of purified iron disks.
is classified as a shitty new-age gift shop.
is an underground black-market occult superstore.
BLUE DIAMOND’S COURT is DEFINITELY about memory...
So I reblogged a post from @radioactivesupersonic earlier today and talked about this in the tags. (Not directly commented, because it was a bit tangential… but tagging you anyways, because hey, if you want to read / think about / chime in on this, absolutely do feel free, I always love seeing what you have to say.)
…but I just found even more support to my “theory”. (Or, conclusion, at the very least?) The conclusion that Blue Gems are definitely all involved with memory.
Lapis, Blue Diamond, Holly Blue, now Aquamarine? The only Blue Gem that doesn’t follow this trend is Sapphire, but she’s not on the Homeworld team anymore, and claimed herself that she’s “rusty” on her role. Who knows, just as Yellow Diamond’s only “role” probably isn’t answering voice chats and giving orders, and a Pearl’s role is a bit more than “your hold things” and “look nice”, as evinced by the Pearl-specific door opening and across-the-board Pearls singing: maybe “future vision” isn’t the singular role of a Sapphire, we just haven’t gotten to see the rest of it.
But I digress.
First of all: The obvious, and the aforementioned. Blue Diamond (whether we’re talking Clockie’s fusion theory or not) is characterized almost entirely on-screen in-present by her mourning, her grieving, her memory. Staying attached to Pink Diamond’s memory.
- Lapis’ mirror from the get-go was replaying incidents of the past. In Same Old World, she used the watery (icy?) surface to do the same. Obviously, she has some kind of memory replay ability/.
And Lapis Lazulis seem pretty high up in the Gem hierarchy. (In the Answer: We see a Lapis or two. Right there. Right by Blue Diamond. Which, given what we’ve heard from Peridot and Holly Blue Agate gushing admiration, and Jasper’s complete corruption stemming from her rage towards Steven /Rose Quartz: the Diamonds are deeply admired. Being around them is an immense privilege. And at least two Lapises have that. Which, could be relevant to their terraforming as easily as an indication of their social standing, but even if we factor in that they were just doing their job, they were their in a Diamond’s presence. That’s Gem privilege right there.)
Holly Blue Agate’s commentary, out of Diamond ‘earshot’ and an emotional moment (emotions tend to bring out the deepest truth of a sentient being’s personality/psychology/etc)? It’s the little things someone focuses on when they’re emotional that tells you most about their thinking. Things like, her purpose that drives her to do what she’s doing there is “to preserve the Pink Diamond legacy”. And the moment of her deepest sorrow being “I was beginning to think we’d been forgotten”. And her immense joy when she brightened to say, “But we haven’t!”
That’s a lot of focus on being remembered.
And then there’s Aquamarine, who just flat-out says, “My memory is perfect.”
I’m not sure how to factor Sapphire into this equation, but you know how the meme goes, the one about statistical errors and outliers. We don’t know what she was like before Garnet. And we don’t know what her other roles besides providing Future Vision may have been……
…then again, few things pair better with foresight than wise use of hindsight.
And as an aside? Yellow Diamond never once says for Blue Diamond to “forget” about her. Almost as if she could never expect such a thing to happen…
re: headcanons - do you have any thoughts on librarian!bitty?
So @marswithghosts has already done this so comprehensively and so accurately that I’m loath to try to implement my headcanons, for fear of unwittingly copying and/or stepping on toes. Please go read A Little Bit Closer and consider that your canon.
That being said…
… what comes to mind here for me is master organizer Bitty. Bitty, who treats his library like he treats his kitchen. Everything in its place, everything alphabetized, easy to find, all information appropriately tagged. He mixes references and knowledge like he mixes flour and sugar in a bowl, finds just the right amalgam of sources and tidbits to create a layer cake of information that he serves up from behind the reference desk with a smile. If someone mentions a bit of information that’s tangential or extraneous, Bitty will gently correct them with a “bless your heart, but that’s actually not applicable here, honey. You see…”
It’s not even that Bitty likes studying; he just likes the idea of everything in its slot, easy to find, and mixing elements together. The information itself is in one ear and out the other; he’s already forgotten yesterday’s reference requests. But he throws himself into today’s.
Enter, eventually, history buff Jack Zimmermann, who needs to find certain documents and references to complete his master’s thesis. He’s quickly enamored of Bitty’s swift information-gathering skills and encyclopedic knowledge of his library and resources. Bitty likes Jack’s looks, of course, but he loves the way Jack consumes information - voraciously, with passion and a clear head. Bitty becomes de facto adviser on Jack’s thesis, and they work together better than either of them had imagined….
I’ve heard a call for non-problematic Phantom so uh here is everything I had immediately available uploaded onto google drive. Some of these are pure Phantom adaptations, some are a bit more tangentially related.
What do you think, why do some people - as intelligent as they may be - do not take pleasure in aessthetics, poetry or philosophy and things that convey these things (such as movies, paintings,...)?
This is a bit tangential, but I was in a bar once and the bartender – the significant other of a good friend of mine – said he “didn’t like art.” I wanted to punch him in the face, mostly because I didn’t believe him & thought he was saying it for dramatic effect. I’ve come across plenty of people who don’t have esoteric tastes, who hate black and white films and can’t be bothered to endure a piece of art that isn’t aggressively entertaining. I’m mildly annoyed by this, but I don’t waste too much stress on it. I have my own problems. But I think there are very few people who (like the above douchebag) don’t like art of any kind. All films are art, all books, all visual pieces that have no other purpose than to be looked at. Stand-up comedy is art; imgur posts that make me laugh out loud are art, so are the ones that make me snigger quietly to myself. Everyone who likes Game of Thrones takes some pleasure in aesthetics. Anyone who listens to Kendrick Lamar has some interest in poetry. If you enjoyed Ex Machina, guess what? Philosophy intrigues you. Art is everywhere. Some art asks you to be involved, to invest your time and thought and stress and suffering. It’s no surprise why some people don’t want to do that, or don’t want to do it that frequently. I found it pretty hard to enjoy Bruce Springsteen’s Darkness On The Edge of Town the first time I listened to it. It’s much more harsh and unfriendly than Born To Run or Greetings From Asbury Park, but when I came to love it, I loved it deeper for the effort, and I knew deeper love.
First off: I solemnly swear I am not muscling in on @dailycharacteroption‘s territory. I am going to start talking about using different classes and archetypes in Eberron from time to time, but I figure that since I am working in a very specific world and DCO is much more generalized, I won’t be stepping on too many toes. That said, if you want more ideas on how to use different classes and archetypes, you should definitely go check DCO, there is some great stuff there!
Occult Adventures introduced use to some awesome new classes, but they occupy a very interesting space in Eberron. The occult classes are Paizo’s answer to old-school psionics, using some of the same source material, but also drawing on real-life occult practices. In Eberron though, where Psionics have such a codified niche, where is the space for the occult, especially since we have the option of using Dreamscarred Press’s fantastic psionics conversion? It is absolutely possible to replace the psionic classes with the occult ones and if you don’t like psionics or don’t want to invest in DSP, I’d suggest doing that. I personally think the two groups of classes can play off of each other quite well and that the occult classes can serve as a bit of a bridge to the psionics. So where do the occult classes fit in Eberron? Here are some suggestions.
The Planes: Like Psionics, the Occult has strong ties to the mind which the Eberron cosmology represents as Xoriat and Dal Quor. A connection to either of those planes works just as well for the Occult classes, so you could expect to find them amongst the Sarlonans, the Inspired, the Kalashtar, and amongst the minions of the Daelkyr. The Kinesticist could also have ties to variety of other planes like Fernia, while the Occultist, Spirtualist, and Medium could have various ties to aspects of Dolurrh. Irian could also work and that plane has some other interesting implications we will get to in a minute. I’m absolutely sure there are others as well that I haven’t come up with yet.
The Undying Court: This is what really sold me on having the occult in Eberron. While I was browsing the Occult Bestiary, I stumbled upon the entry for the Prana Ghost. It struck me as being very familiar with its generally good outlook, connection to positive energy, and willingness to help its ancestors. Then it struck me, if I changed the Prana’s type to Deathless, it would make an excellent addition to the Undying Court. Both the Occult classes and the Court place a high emphasis on positive energy and once I twigged onto that, it seemed obvious. I suspect there are quite a few elves of Aerenal that practice some sort of occult magic.
The Valenar: Occult elves, take 2! The Valenar’s connection to their ancestors also makes for an excellent source of occult power. Spiritualists who have such a strong connection to their ancestor that they allow the spirit to manifest would be practically revered amongst these elves, while the Medium and Occultist can represent elves who are attached to lesser ancestors, much like Binders were used in 3.5. The Mesmerist has its place there too, allowing the insane charisma of the elven ancestors to be emulated even at low levels.
Blood of Vol: Ha, you thought we were done with elves didn’t you? This one’s a bit more tangential, but the Blood of Vol originally sprung from the exact same type of connection to the ancestors that fuels the Valenar and Undying Court, so I wouldn’t be surprised to find some occult practices amongst the modern Blood of Vol, although they would be far fewer.
The Silver Flame: While it may not always be the focus of the formal Church, but the Silver Flame is definitely an ancient magical practice, and it is a conglomerate of souls. I remember that one of the older arguments about the Church was that it is less of an analogy for Catholicism and much closer in role and purpose to that of the Jedi is Star Wars. There’s definitely some occult background there.
Curiosities: The last suggestion I have is that occult classes may occasionally just crop up, kind of like sorcery does. This would certainly occur at a lower rate than spontaneous arcane magic, but more frequently than psionics. It does kind of make sense though, especially for the Spiritualist, the Mesmerist, and the Occultist. Spiritualist would have become more common throughout the Last War with loads of people dying off, especially if you go with my canon, where Khorvaire got depopulated 40-60%. Beyond its magical component, the Mesmerist doesn’t really have a reason to be restricted and a number of Dragonmarked Houses would love to get their hands on them. Plus, with Adventure Archeologists™ running about it only makes sense some of them would try and read objects.
Hi! I have a question. I think tjlc has some very valid points when it comes to there being a huge secret about series 4 of Sherlock, and how the creators keep saying they've planned for it since the beginning. But what if it isn't making johnlock canon? What else do you think it could be? I'm asking quite seriously what you think! I want johnlock too but I'm just a little worried/skeptical. Thank you :)
Hey! Thanks for this question. I’m assuming you’re asking me because of this post. I’m going to answer your question a little bit tangentially, but I hope it helps with your skepticism, or at least helps you think about how you want to frame s4 for yourself.
Here’s what I know: when writers set out to tell a story, the thing to do, to make a story work, is to set the terms of the conversation they plan to have. That way, the audience knows what sort of story they can expect, and what sort of outcomes might result. In setting the terms of the conversation, writers make promises to the audience. Based on those promises, the audience can decide whether or not they want to follow the story.
While various elements–plot devices, characters, twists and turns, revelations–can be used to surprise the audience or shift the terms of the conversation one way or another, it’s generally considered bad writing to break the terms laid out in the beginning, or to break the promises the story has made. (Refine, yes; break, no.)
Sherlock is a story about a detective in a modern setting. That’s a parameter the writers chose to set. It’s not, for example, an x-files style show. If they were to suddenly introduce an alien abduction plotline, that would be bad, because it would violate the terms of the conversation.
Did they do a Victorian episode? Yup. Did they use that episode to break the terms of the conversation? No. They didn’t suddenly plunge Sherlock into another era for funsies, never to mention it again. They made it work within the parameters they’d already set. Clever clever.
So, if we look at the series as a whole, what are the terms of Sherlock’s conversation?
In the very beginning of the show, the two of them meet, and immediately start negotiating the terms of their very intense, very unusual relationship. They come together harmoniously, they scrap and work and break apart. This relationship is the focal point of the show, and the only thread that ties all of the episodes together. And we’re not talking about the standard buddy-movie deal, where the relationship is the unmoveable anchor that holds the other elements together. This shit is rocky. It’s volatile. It’s emotional.
There are people who do not see this. That doesn’t mean it isn’t there. It means they don’t see it.
If the “shattering climax” of the show involves anything other than John and Sherlock, Sherlock and John, then it will have broken the terms the story set out for itself. Again, this could happen, but it would be terrible writing. It would be Mofftiss throwing their precious darling under the bus. And not the fun Strawberry Jizz Fizz bus.
Not convinced? Here’s another term of the conversation: you see but you do not observe. This is a show that, while a casual viewer can enjoy it, leads the more invested / clever fan down the path of obsession with a constant, mind-blowing, attention to detail. As a piece of media, Sherlock invites the viewer to do all the stuff we do here: pause, take screencaps, zoom in, ask “what the hell is that?” It rewards the viewer who pays close attention.
So, here’s where things get really tricky, and where the really smart stuff kicks in.
Let’s say I want to create a plot that requires people to really think and observe closely, in order to figure out what is going on. I want to create a full on mystery, where the heart of the story is hidden in plain sight, and whether or not you see it depends on the tools you bring to the table. Mofftiss have to rely on the majority of the audience to be blind to what’s happening, in order to make the story work as a mystery, as a game.
What better way to make this go, than to rely on the inherent blindness created by heterosexual privilege? Genius. Brilliant.
And here’s the thing: the game, of hiding the real story in the queer subtext, illuminates and makes sense of the primary term of the conversation, for those who figure out that subtext. In other words, the primary subject of the story, John and Sherlock’s relationship, does not make sense without the queer subtext. If it’s just friendship, then most of the punch would go out of the drama. For a lot of viewers, who don’t see the queer subtext, Sherlock did lose interest, with series 3, and TAB. But, for those of us fully engaged with the queer subtext, the story is wildly interesting, one might say almost TOO interesting. Why do you think that is?
This story is for us. This story has promised us that it’s about John and Sherlock. This story has promised us that it will resolve…something to do with them. lol.
Could it really be anything else? I don’t think so.
I think Mofftiss are incredibly clever, and bold, and brazen. Like I said in my other post, I will be cheering them on.
BUT what if they don’t follow through?
If they don’t follow through, that will be their fault. Do you see? While there are many things they can do with this series, many variations on a reasonable resolution to the problems they’ve laid out so far, they can’t break John and Sherlock apart, and leave them broken. Not if they’re really going to deliver “insane wish fulfillment.”
The real answer to your question is all over the show. Take, for example, these two reasonable statements, from the beginning, of what it’s all about:
Nothing happens to me.
Sherlock Holmes is a great man, and I think one day—if we’re very very lucky—he might even be a good one.
In a lot of ways, this story is about how *everything* happens to John, and how Sherlock learns to be a good man. The question the story will answer is not whether these things will come to pass, because of course they will: these men are heroes, and we’re here to watch them win (besides, LOVE CONQUERS ALL). The question is how.
We’ve already had a partial answer, in TAB:
There’s always two of us.
Now we just have to wait to see how it all plays out, and whether or not Mofftiss will manage to make it work.
This is a bit of a tangential rant to the feminist Slaanesh thing, so that’s why I’m not adding it to a reblog.
One of the things bothers me, and the fandom is worse about this than canon, is how freakin’ feminine the daemonettes are. They are explicitly adrogynous in canon! Which somehow gets interpreted as long haired, busty, and generally acting stereotypically female. And I’d be cool with that, if it weren’t. Every. Single. Daemonette. Ever.
And it leads to this weird dichotomy were Horrors, Bloodletters, Plaguerbearers = male and Daemonettes = female. Which is wrong. THEY’RE ALL MADE OF WARP STUFF, NONE OF THEM HAVE A GENDER.
I just wish there were more masculine daemonettes, more adrogynous ones, more ‘so alien that human notions of masculinity/feminity can’t apply’ Slaanesh needs to be an equal opportunity tempter/ress in fan art*, is what I’m saying.
R you worried about Lou's weight? I wasn't in the 1st place, but then I saw a pic of him a few months ago n the pic of him a few nights ago n yeah.. It really does not look healthy to me.. He lost weight around this time last year as well, didn't he?
okayyyyy. i am answering this to address this one time and then i’m not talking about this anymore.
people speculating all this with louis, talking about him getting too thin and partying too much and seeing people suggest he might be on drugs…it’s gross. it’s flat out gross. i see things like that on my dash and am just…immediately uncomfortable.
because here’s the thing - when louis was in chicago a few weeks ago, there was not a single person who said he was too thin. no one was saying, “oh, wow, he looks unhealthy!” everyone was talking about how cute he looked, not that he looked ill. so, since that was less than a month ago - not much has changed. we get a handful of unflattering pap photos and suddenly it’s, “OH MY GOD HE LOOKS AWFUL HES TOO THIN HES DRINKING TOO MUCH”….i think it’s funny that the only times we ever see people discuss how awful he looks, declaring that all of us should immediately be worried, it’s paired with how he must be drinking too much and he has to stop.
no one ever talks about the other boys this way. conversations about the others seem to come from places of actual concern, but when it comes to louis, it’s always these harsh speculations with no evidence to back anything up, just people spewing nonsense that ends up making him look terrible. and that’s not the media’s doing - that’s the fandom’s doing because i haven’t seen any media outlet talk about how he must be on drugs or partying too much, yet the amount of fans i’ve seen say those things? countless.
i saw something saying that you can’t police people and tell them to stop worrying - of course you’re allowed to worry about your fave, we all do, but for some reason, when it comes to people “worrying” about louis, it’s paired with wild hyperboles and ridiculous accusations that harry, niall, and liam are always exempt from, and it’s so unfair to louis that this always happens.
this got a bit tangential, but it’s been bothering me all day.
It does occur to me after watching this week’s Flash episode, why I get so bothered by some of the fan defenses of Mick Rory, despite the fact that he actually is my second favorite character.
As I mentioned in my last post, I saw quite a lot of people reacting to the “I’m not calling you Supergirl” scene by blaming SARA, because apparently she caused Mick to be rude, because he was hurt that she told her to ignore him.
(As I mentioned in my last post, the fact that we seem to be ignoring that Kara was visibly uncomfortable at a sexually suggestive remark, namely that she can “see everyone’s bits”. But that’s tangential).
It reminds me of all of the posts after Marooned that outright blamed Rip Hunter’s explosion of temper for Mick Rory betraying the team. Though obviously that was far bigger an issue than just insulting a young woman’s choice of moniker and deciding to call her a g-rated gendered insult like “skirt” instead. It does fit a particular pattern.
There seems to be this idea that Mick Rory’s hurt feelings somehow excuse everything unpalatable that the character does. Even when an innocent third party is involved.
Honestly, it doesn’t MATTER if Sara was justified in cutting off Mick. It didn’t excuse his disrespect of Kara. (And no, the fact that he did call her Supergirl later does not make that scene less disrespectful. Funny, sure. But disrespectful.) For one thing, KARA didn’t hurt his feelings. Kara was innocent.
It doesn’t matter that Rip was absolutely out of line in his tirade in Marooned. (He was, without question.) That does not justify the fact that Mick sold out the entire team. Ray, Kendra, Sara, Jax and Martin had done NOTHING to deserve death at the hands of the pirates.
Fans need to stop pretending that Mick’s actions are somehow above criticism because his feelings are hurt.
I absolutely agree with those who read Mick as having impulse control problems, difficulty managing his anger, and he’s a lot more sensitive than he seems. He is absolutely mentally ill and has some vulnerabilities that I think the rest of the team sometimes forgets.
But he also has a very bad habit of taking his hurt feelings out on people who were not involved in the initial offense. And that’s on Mick. Not anyone else.