wilds things

Gentle thought: when Eleven can’t sleep, she usually finds Hopper sitting at the kitchen table nursing a cup of coffee, unable to sleep himself. This nightly routine becomes a tradition of theirs. He pours her a cup of black coffee and toasts some Eggos. Sometimes he dusts off a few books from the bookshelf in his room and she practices reading. Sometimes he tells her the wild stories of things he’s seen over the years as police chief. Sometimes he teaches her card games or she shows him how to draw. When sleepiness finally washes over El as they settle on the couch to watch midnight cartoons, Hopper places a blanket over her and lets her take the couch for the night. Some mornings they watch the sun rise over the woods and the mountains, the soft glow of sunlight emerging over the darkness. El knows this is what home is

anonymous asked:

Do you have any wild stories about licking things you shouldn't have?

Hoo boy buckle up because I was a terrible child

When I was 6, we were visiting my grandparents in another state and my mom had taken me grocery shopping with her at this little local store. I distinctly remember wondering what the shopping cart tasted like, so I licked the hand rail.

Now, I’m not one to leave things half-done, so I didn’t lick just one spot. I licked the entirety of the rail.

My mom stared in horror; she later told me that she knew right away that I would get sick (this was at the turn of the millennium, so this is before they disinfected shopping carts on a regular basis).

Anyway, we finished grocery shopping and went back to my grandparents’ house. I don’t remember much of what happened after that because I got so sick. Diarrhea, vomiting, whole nine yards. I was miserable. It felt like three days of hell.

So, now I’m severely dehydrated, and all five of us pile into this two door car and make our way to the ER. And, because I was A) six years old and B) dehydrated, they had a really hard time getting the IV in my body (which is probably why I have an aversion to needles now but I digress).

Anyway, they got some fluids in me, and I turned out okay in the long run. My mom also told me at a later date that this all happened in the span of 24 hours, not 72 (I was so miserable that it skewed my perception of time).

Shopping carts taste like plastic, metal, and a brush with death btw

tbh this year so far has been WILD cause things are SO DIFFERENT than they were last year and I am legitmately happy with where I am in my life and fucking content as shit and my mental health has been better or simply chemical (feeling sad but being like ‘idk why Im pretty happy with how shit is’) and like

its about fucking time

oscar wilde
  • had three middle names
  • spoke five languages
  • was sentenced to prison for sodomy
  • was 16 when he had his first kiss
  • loved to travel
  • had an eidetic memory
  • lied about his age on his marriage certificate
  • held seances at his house
  • spoke with his hand in front of his mouth bc he was embarrassed by how supernaturally white his teeth were
  • kept a vase of flowers on his writing desk to neutralize the smell of his ashtray
  • had a passion for interior design and aesthetics—his drawing room was painted blue and covered in dragons, he even pressed feathers into the plaster to make it look cool
  • the kids at his school called him “grey crow”
  • one of the reasons he didn’t commit suicide was bc he was afraid he would go to hell for it
  • his favorite word was ivory
  • his last words were “i am in a duel to the death with this wallpaper, one of us has got to go”
  • his grave, in paris, has become the target of mass quantities of lipstick kisses. no lie. it’s literally covered in lipstick stains. and a sphinx. he also asked to be buried with his former lover’s ashes
I have nothing now but praise for my life. I’m not unhappy. I cry a lot because I miss people…They leave me and I love them more…What I dread is the isolation. … There are so many beautiful things in the world…
—  Maurice Sendak, Where the Wild Things Are
We may just have a decoder ring for TFP

Okay. I’m writing this meta sitting on a plane having seen TFP exactly once (in English) and having done a quick Wikipedia refresher on The Importance of Being Earnest after not having read it for 10 years. I’m also typing this on my phone so don’t expect formatting.

We need to add the out of the blue conversation about Oscar Wilde into the pile of “something fucky” about this series. If you can, try to put aside your rage about invoking Oscar’s ghost in this atrocity of an episode and bear with me. And if you’re not in a place to entertain tin foil hat conspiracies, that is absolutely okay.

Premise: My faith in Mark Gatiss is at about zero right now, but I’m still reluctant to believe that Mark would not only draw our attention to this play, by this man, in a show steeped in 1895, when there was absolutely no plot relevant reason to do so other than to get up the hopes of queer viewers and then brutally dash them.

WHY, then. Why any of this.

It could be brutally unnecessary queerbaiting. Or, alternatively: it could be something fucky. (If I’m wrong, then I’ll be the first in line to drag him, btw.)

If you’re not familiar: Wilde was a famous queer dramatist in Victorian London, he was a contemporary and friend of ACD, he wrote awesome queer literature that was too obvious and he was arrested and imprisoned for it (in 1895) which caused his early death. Being Earnest, in particular, is famous for being one of the most blatantly, obviously queer coded works of the Victorian era. It’s in part what got him arrested in the first place. I mean. There’s a character named “bunbury” (just wait for it), and the phrase “Earnest” was itself a code word among the Victorian gay community used to identify one another.

Now. Here’s where the fucky part begins. Being Earnest was written in 1895, the same year Wilde was arrested for aggravated gayness. Drawing attention to this play in particular is now drawing another 1895 parallel in actual BBC Sherlock canon, for better or for worse.

So we’re to believe that for no reason whatsoever, when Sherlock and Mycroft are saying their goodbyes to each other thanks to that idiotic “patience grenade”, that Sherlock finds it necessary to remind Mycroft that he played Lady Bracknell in Being Earnest and that he did a good job of it. Well that’s weird. Until we look up the character synopsis of Lady Bracknell: “the perfect symbol of Victorian earnestness - the belief that style is more important than substance and that social and class barriers are to be enforced.”

SOMETHING’S FUCKY, SOMETHING’S MAJORLY FUCKY. This is a perfect summation of Mycroft’s role in TAB. the perfect image of the establishment. The enemy that must be defeated. It’s also the perfect description of this episode: style over substance, and that social and class barriers (heteronormativity) are to be enforced.

Just for funsies, let’s look up the character synopses for the two main characters of Being Earnest:

John (Jack) Worthing: A young, eligible bachelor about town. His family pedigree is a mystery, but his seriousness and sincerity are evident. He proposes to the honorable Gwendolyn Fairfax, and despite leading a double life, eventually displays his conformity to the Victorian moral and cultural standards. (Holy shit, it’s John.)

Algernon Moncreiff: A languid poser of the leisure class, bored by conventions and looking for excitement. Algernon, unlike Jack, is not serious and generally out for his own gratification. Lady Bracknell is Algernon’s aunt. (Holy shit, it’s Sherlock, down to the funny name.)

And just to round things out, who is Gwendolyn Fairfax, the woman John proposes to? She “believes style is important, not sincerity. She is submissive in public but rebels in private.” This would fit with pre-redemption arc Mary.

The plot of the play is that both Algernon and Jack lead a secret double life using the assumed name “Ernest”. Algernon pretends to have an invalid friend named “bunbury” (ahem) out in the country who he needs to tend to, and uses this as an excuse to avoid social obligations. (This really has shades of sounding like the institutionalized Euros plot?) Jack, meanwhile, escapes his life of duty and responsibility in the countryside and becomes a libertine named Ernest when he goes to the city. (Oh hi, adventure craving John.) Farcical miscommunications happen, blah blah, the play ends with everyone officially named Ernest and everyone happily engaged to be married.

Back to the question, WHY, WHY FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WOULD THEY DO THIS? I think I may have an inkling. Being Earnest is known for two things: being suuuuper gay, and being trivial and farcical to the point that reviewers of the era were hesitant to even give it a shot. The queer coding implications of bringing this in are so obvious it goes without saying, so let’s move on to the farce. Reviewer William Archer said that he enjoyed watching it but found it to be empty of meaning. “What can a poor critic do with a play that raises no principle, whether of art or morals, creates its own canons and conventions, and is nothing but an absolutely willful expression of an irrepressibly witty personality?” Others said “it is of nonsense all compact”, and “the story is almost too preposterous” (to not be a soap opera).

Are these critiques sounding familiar at all??? Long story short: IT’S A LITERAL FARCE.

Lastly, let’s not forget what quote Mycroft actually brings into it: “the pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple.” The possible implications of that, I believe, go without saying.

I don’t want to get too far down into the meta rabbit hole because if I’m wrong it would be a waste of my time. But. SOMETHING IS EXTREMELY FUCKY HERE.

If - IF, and I recognize it’s a big if - there is a bigger plan here, our question is why do it this way, why bother with all this. I can think of two potentials: 1) If they’re highlighting the environment that ACD Sherlock was written in to make a larger point about heteronormative culture, or 2) something went wrong at the BBC level and they’re highlighting that we’re still culturally stuck in the same era.

Can we all just agree that there is a strong possibility this reference was written in for some sort of a purpose? Hopefully? Probably? There are too many parallels here and the signaling in the dialogue to this play was too out of place to just drop Wilde’s name for the sake of it? And if they did it just to add to the queer subtext that they’re not going to make use of, this is next level queerbaiting to the extent that I genuinely have a hard time believing Gatiss would allow this to happen? I’m hoping against hope? We know how important Wilde is to Mark as a gay man. If there’s nothing more, then I’ll come back to this topic in the future and pick it apart as free standing queer subtext. This just heightens the stakes of the “brilliance or dumpster fire” quandary we’re staring down right now.

If it were me writing Sherlock (and obviously it’s not, and obviously I don’t trust these guys right now): I would say that it would be a nice touch to update Wilde’s version of being “Ernest” - having to take on an assumed name and a secret double life and hide your queerness under subtext - to the modern queer standard of just “Being Earnest”. As in honest. True to one’s self. Ernest to Earnest.

It’s fucky. It’s just so fucky. What the fuck are they up to, guys.