critical debates in design

Recent su/bomb spoilers

Likes:
• Cool kids being cool
• Sadie getting friends outside of Lars
• CONNIE!!!
• No automatic usage of Stevonnie
• Doug is a sweetie pie who wants to be admirable in his daughter’s eyes and be more like his wife. Bless~
• Good build up to Lars’ disappearance (since it’s so seemingly something in character for him to do but it had seemed like he’d finally broken out of his jerk shell; it makes it more insidious that he goes missing before he could)
• Aqua is a fun jerk of a villain that’ll be at least fun to hate
• Navy wasn’t the one who made the report!
• It was Steven. A good use of his positive character traits being turned against him, I must say

Dislikes:
• The backgrounds are noticeably worse, like even more so
• The pacing is off ( the rest of the abductions don’t pack the same punch as Lars’, Steven’s /twice/ used sacrifices*, when you have a character like Aqua with that type of power fight scenes need to at least be exciting so that it feels like a tease for an even cooler one coming)
• The fight scenes weren’t that exciting because stopping /any/ type** of scene with info dumps is too jarring and
• The fight choreography continues to be meh.
• It seems to be official that Garnet is no longer the leader of the cg, not only because of the “let’s split up gang” scene (which was her idea anyway) but every decision Steven makes isn’t adamantly responded to (just a “Steven are you sure?” rather than a straight up No.) until the last one.
• What’s there to say about Topaz? They’re a ~mysterious~ and quiet fusion (most of the time) were have we heard that before?
•*Steven giving himself up to the diamonds might have been a good cliffhanger… if they hadn’t done it twice. (Technically thrice in this whole season)
•**Steven still struggling with his identity and poor decisions isn’t a bad thing and him shutting down during battle actually isn’t what bugs me. It’s that for all this show being good at quiet scenes, the writers refuse to do so with Steven’s thoughts. Imagine if Steven suddenly goes silent, frozen like Lars (an interesting dichotomy) or if we as the audience could hear his thoughts but other characters can’t. His outburst at the end would be more impactful because then the characters would know for the first time that Steven (still) has these issues. Not just by some gibberish during battle.

All and all a meh bomb: we’re finally getting somewhere in the plot but poor pacing has really affected everything else and the only characters who received any real development were Lars and Sadie

anonymous asked:

can you tell us more about what ToK is? cause I'm still kind if confused about it, and is it a separate class or does it take a study hall block or something (that might be different for different schools though?)

It’s an International Baccalaureate class! It just has separate parameters than the other IB classes. And it’s pretty regular across schools, from what I can tell. It means Theory of Knowledge, which is basically analyzing the way we think. Imagine a philosophy x current events x debate x psychology x critical thinking class. It’s designed to shape your mind and make you question where you get your information and how you form your opinions! It’s my absolute favorite.

Join us for the final Design and Violence debate!

Design and Violence is an ongoing online curatorial experiment that explores the manifestations of violence in contemporary society by pairing critical thinkers with examples of challenging design work. For this debate series, spanning four evenings, the curators have chosen four provocative motions supported by case studies that will be argued for faults and merits.

Debate III: April 17, 6:30—8 pm, Bartos Theater

The fourth debate will center upon Temple Grandin’s “serpentine ramp,” a slaughterhouse design modification that attempts stress reduction and a more humane death for animals. Professor Gary L. Francione (Distinguished Professor of Law, Rutgers and author, Eat Like You Care: An Examination of the Morality of Eating Animals) and Nicola Twilley (Edible Geography, co-founder of the Foodprint Project, and director of Studio-X NYC) will deliver debate motions, moderated by Paola Antonelli.

Join us for the one or all of the Design and Violence Debates!

Design and Violence is an ongoing online curatorial experiment that explores the manifestations of violence in contemporary society by pairing critical thinkers with examples of challenging design work. For this debate series, spanning four evenings, the curators have chosen four provocative motions supported by case studies that will be argued for faults and merits.

Debate I: March 27, 6:30–8PM, Bartos Theater

Moderated by Design and Violence co-curator Paola Antonelli, the second debate centers upon The Liberator, the world’s first 3D printed gun. The gun’s designer, Cody Wilson, and author and journalist Rob Walker (New York Times, Design Observer, Slate) will deliver debate motions, after which will follow a discussion focused on open-source design, the limits of gun laws and rights, and our assumptions about the ethics of design.