within or without

I’m so so sad that arc v is over

I mean every series has its problems, and I’m sure everyone has something they wish had ended differently, but in the end - that’s what fanworks are for! Arc V in particular has given us so much content, but left an amazing amount of room for us to meddle with characters and side plots, giving us room to fit interactions within the boundaries of canon without affecting the end result - which is something not many series do well.

Arc V has been huge on fan interaction, so I think they left things vague at the end for a reason. Think about the post-canon Leo Akaba redemption that could happen. Think about what that means for all the dimensional counterparts. Think of all the ways things could play out. They want us to continue the story however we see fit - each of us can fill in the gaps however we want!

In all, I wish the ending had given us a tiny bit more to work with, but given the rollercoaster these last 48 episodes have been, it was the ending that best fit the feel of the season. And that was one thing the creators wanted- for each season to feel like an entirely different show. They accomplished that, so having the final episode revert to s1 feel would have been really off. I think they did a great job with a lot of things!

Thank you for being such a huge part of my life for the last three years, Arc V!! You kept me going through a lot of personal stuff, gave me friends when I needed them the most and kept me going during times of loss. And that’s what YGO is really all about!!! I’m gonna miss watching it every week, but now that we have the conclusion - this is when we can really explore all the what-ifs!! All the perfect AUs that call back to canon!! Everything!!

This isn’t the end; this is just the beginning of a new chapter!!

anonymous asked:

TG:re isn't a tragedy like the original was. Why do people keep using that as a defense for Kaneki's development being stunted?

While this fandom does have a really heavy Kaneki bias, I’m not even going to deny that. However, once again I don’t think it’s my place to discuss fandom habits. 

Instead let’s talk about narrative for a moment. @randomthoughtpatterns already gave a pretty definitive answer on how Kaneki doesn’t change in the narrative [x].

Your question is however, why is Kaneki allowed to still exist within a narrative without changing? Why do people still find that compelling. The answer to that is framing. Almost equal in importance to the details of a character, their personality, their actions, is how a character’s actions and personality interact with the narrative as a whole. 

What you need is consequence. Consequences, consequences, consequences are what make good characters. For the most part all of Kaneki’s actions in the narrative do have a direct consequence that hits him hard. Even though sometimes like in the recent moon arc there seems to be a delayed reaction about things. Kaneki does not exist as a lone noble gas floating, not allowing himself to change. Human relationships are chemical reactions, Kaneki’s refusal to change effects the narrative, and it affects the people around him, and they too realize this and change accordingly just as the circumstances.

That’s why the Rize hallucination reminded Kaneki of his personal role in things during the Yamori torture scene. Otherwise he might have been in danger of simply being a victim of narrative events, rather than somebody who brought them on by refusal to change. 

Tg:re might not be a tragedy, but tragedies aren’t so different than comedies. Bad things can happen in both, ultimately when it comes to narrative it’s framing that matters. 


I KNOW what you’re trying to DO there gamefreak

art blog | twitter

  • King George III: It's not easy being British
  • King George III: The reason being it is impossible for me, as a British person, to walk into any museum, in any nation on the planet earth, without, within five minutes, start to feel guilty.
  • King George III: You have no idea what that feels like!
  • King George III: (to americans) You will, OH, you will!
  • King George III: One day all this shame will be yours my American friends

via Dan Rather

And so it begins.

Of the nearly 20 inaugurations I can remember, there has never been one that felt like today. Not even close. Never mind the question of the small size of the crowds, or the boycott by dozens of lawmakers, or even the protest marches slated for tomorrow across the country. Those are plays upon the stage. What is truly unprecedented in my mind is the sheer magnitude of quickening heartbeats in millions of Americans, a majority of our country if the polls are to be believed, that face today buffeted within and without by the simmering ache of dread.

I have never seen my country on an inauguration day so divided, so anxious, so fearful, so uncertain of its course.

I have never seen a transition so divisive with cabinet picks so encumbered by serious questions of qualifications and ethics.

I have never seen the specter of a foreign foe cast such a dark shadow over the workings of our democracy.

I have never seen an incoming president so preoccupied with responding to the understandable vagaries of dissent and seemingly unwilling to contend with the full weight and responsibilities of the most powerful job in the world.

I have never seen such a tangled web of conflicting interests.

Despite the pageantry of unity on display at the Capitol today, there is a piercing sense that we are entering a chapter in our nation’s evolving story unlike one ever yet written. To be sure, there are millions of Donald Trump supporters who are euphoric with their candidate’s rise. Other Trump voters have expressed reservations, having preferred his bluster to his rival’s perceived shortcomings in the last election, but admitting more and more that they are not sure what kind of man they bestowed the keys to the presidency. The rest of America - the majority of voters - would not be - and indeed is not - hesitant in sharing its conclusions on the character and fitness of Donald Trump for the office he now holds.

The hope one hears from even some of Donald Trump’s critics is that this moment might change him. Perhaps, as he stood there on a grey, drab, January day, reciting the solemn oath of office demanded by our Constitution, as he looked out across what Charles Dickens once called the “city of magnificent intentions”, he would somehow grasp the importance of what he was undertaking. Perhaps he would understand that he must be the president of all the United States, in action as well as in word. Perhaps, but there has already been so much past that is prologue.

There is usually much fanfare around inaugural addresses. They are also usually forgotten - with some notable exceptions. I think today will be remembered, not so much for the rhetoric or the turns of phrase but for the man who delivered them and the era they usher us forth.

Mr. Trump’s delivery was staccato and there was very little eye contact as he seemed to be reading carefully from a teleprompter. His words and tone were angry and defiant. He is still in campaign mode and nary a whiff of a unifying spirit. There was little or nothing of uplift - the rhetoric of Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy, or Reagan. We heard a cavalcade of slogans and one liners, of huge promises to “bring back” an America - whatever that really means to many who look at our history and see progress in our current society.

The speech started with a message of an establishment in Washington earning riches on the back of struggling families across the country. It was an odd note, considering the background of many of his cabinet picks. President Trump painted a very dark picture of the current state of our nation, beset by gangs and drugs and violence, regardless of what the data shows. His words swelled with his economic populism and the nationalism of “America first.” The applause was sparse, and I imagine many more being turned off, even sickened, rather than inspired by what our new President had to say. President Obama looked on with an opaque poker face. One could only imagine what he was thinking.

It bears remembering that one never can predict the arc of a presidency. It is an office that is far too often shaped by circumstance well beyond its occupant’s control. Those challenges, wherever and however they may rise, now will fall on the desk of President Trump. We can only see what will happen. We hope, for the security and sanctity of our Republic, that Mr. Trump will respond to the challenges with circumspection and wisdom. Today’s rhetoric was not reassuring.

Our democracy demands debate and dissent - fierce, sustained, and unflinching when necessary. I sense that tide is rising amongst an opposition eager to toss aside passivity for action. We are already seeing a more emboldened Democratic party than I have witnessed in ages. It is being fueled by a fervent energy bubbling from the grassroots up, rather than the top down.

These are the swirling currents about our ship of state. We now have a new and untested captain. His power is immense, but it is not bestowed from a divinity on high. It is derived, as the saying goes, from the consent of the governed. That means President Trump now works for us - all of us. And if he forgets that, it will be our duty to remind him.


George Harrison
25 February, 1943 - 29 November, 2001

The man I never got to meet was the one who influenced me the most.

The quiet one that still had a voice that yelled to help Bangladesh and say Hare Krishna. The one who dedicated a concert to fund a clinic that had lost it’s funds but instead the media deciding to focus on a mindless ‘feud’ and a divorce rather than an act of kindness in a dark world. This man has influenced me in so ways. Saying to be humble and share all the world, don’t take too much. That death is just a state of mind, it is simply as if you’re taking off your suit. That comforts me more than it should.

Now, as I sit here in my room, listening to the song that began it all for me, I wish you never left. But as you said before

Life flows on within you and without you.

Thank you, George, and we love you.

It’s almost 2017. I’ve done everything I told myself I wouldn’t do in 2016. I still haven’t kicked my bad habits, when you’re looking for answers where there are none… it’s a bad habit within itself, everyone moves on without you and you’re still here writing your I love you’s. It’s another vicious December, it’s still another me that I can’t accept. Just because you write well, just because you’re smiling when you’re not really up to it… it doesn’t mean that you’re okay. It’s another 4 am poem, yeah, I should be asleep. I’ve been sleeping these last few days, your addiction to anything will do that to you. You spend energy on negative parts of your life and sleep when you’re most positive– I’m almost certain that I don’t dream anymore, and that kills me whenever I’m awake. The person that I’d love to be, drowning inside of things that I can’t let go. So don’t tell me that I’m amazing or that I’m great– I know that I’m not, I’m just trying to make this year a little better than the last and maybe that’s the only way that I know how to survive.
—  A letter for 2017 me
sgt pepper explained
  • sgt pepper: the beatles are having an identity crisis
  • a little help from my friends: ringo wants drugs (and the boys got him)
  • lucy in the sky: the john lennon equivalent of hanging his son's drawing on the fridge
  • getting better: wtf yeah i guess it is
  • fixing a hole: paul has chores
  • she's leaving home: paul john and george martin's lonely hearts club band
  • for the benefit of mr kite: scary circus (normal circus)
  • within you without you: george and george martin's lonely hearts club band
  • when i'm 64: things we said today but with grandchildren on yerr knee
  • lovely rita: faul's thirsty for the lady who killed paul
  • good morning: john went for a walk today (oh boy)
  • sgt pepper reprise: the beatles try to convince us once again that it's not them but they're gonna have to try harder than that
  • a day in the life: was george even here

I live in the pacific. Outside of Africa, this is the number one place which demonstrates the failure of postcolonial nationalisms. Most of the island nations have independence from the colonial powers, and it means precisely shit because they are economically dominated from both within and without.

On one hand, by the global capitalist economy which these nations are absolutely dependent upon for material survival. The productive forces in postcolonial Pacific nation-states are extremely underdeveloped and non-self-sustainable. The dependency on international capital means that foreign interests are still in control of these lands. The only difference is that the colonial regime is now de facto. Explicit military occupation has ended in the former colonies because it is no longer necessary - the nation-state’s inability to respond to the global capitalist economy except by capitulating to it means that colonialism operates more smoothly and more productively than it ever did under de jure colonialism. 

On the other hand, postcolonial nationalism ends up centralising power in pre-existing materially privileged classes within the indigenous population. In Tonga, the traditional chieftainship consolidated itself into a monarchy; in Aotearoa, chiefly genealogical lines within iwi have essentially corporatised the tribal structure and established themselves as a CEO class. Nationalism provides no response for working class indigenous peoples to criticise this concentration of material political-economic power in the hands of indigenous capitalists. According to nationalism, the important distinction is between peoples’ ethno-national identities, not their actually existing relationship to material power. It doesn’t matter how much your labour is expropriated, how much your resources are appropriated, if the class who benefit from this process are “your” nation, then nationalism does not recognise exploitation to have occurred. Thus, the Tongan aristocracy appropriated millions upon millions of dollars from the labour of a population primarily sustaining itself by subsistence agriculture. 

Nationalism is a dead end. International proletarian revolution, which recognises the similar material relationship to production experienced by all working class people around the world, is the only way out of the crisis we’re facing. We have tried nationalism, and it’s gotten us brown managers to facilitate the expansion of capitalism - nothing more. We need better than that. We deserve better than that. We need to destroy capitalism on a global scale and build global communism, and using ethnonational identity is just a useless way of achieving that. I love my people, I love my tribe, I love my culture, but I’ll fucking burn a Tino Rangatiratanga flag before I accept that I have more in common with the brown bourgeoisie than the white proletariat. 


We’re setting up to do this shot, we just wanna see Cate sort of tugging this child along. He’s forgetting how to walk. And she walked off down the sidewalk and they kind of edged over to the edge of frame and disappeared behind the tree and then right at this moment the little boy tugs on her hand and then she bends down to find out what it is that he wants and he puckers up his lips and gives her this kiss. And I’m watching this on the monitor and I’m going “Oh my god, that’s amazing!”

David Fincher, Director’s commentary
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

You were within, but I was without. You were with me, but I was not with you. So you called, you shouted, you broke through my deadness, you flared, blazed, and banished my blindness, you lavished your fragrance, and I gasped.

 St.Augustine, Confessions

Mbti Types as The Great Gatsby Quotes

ISFJ: “I was within and without, simultaneously enchanted and repelled by the inexhaustible variety of life.”

ESTJ: “But I can still read the gray names, and they will give you a better impression than my generalities of those who accepted Gatsby’s hospitality and paid him the subtle tribute of knowing nothing about him.”

ISFP: “The exhilarating ripple of her voice was a wild tonic in the rain.”

ENFJ: “There must have been moments even that afternoon when Daisy tumbled short of his dreams- not through her own fault, but because of the colossal vitality of his illusion.” 

INTP: “I tried to go then, but they wouldn’t hear of it; perhaps my presence made them feel more satisfactorily alone.”

INFP: “No amount of fire or freshness can change what a man will store up in his ghostly heart.”

ENTP: “’You see, I think everything’s terrible anyhow,’ she went on in a convincing way. ‘Everybody thinks so- the most advanced people. And I know. I’ve been everywhere and seen everything and done everything.’” 

ESFP: ”It was one of those rare smiles with a quality of eternal reassurance in it, that you may come across four or five times in life. It faced- or seemed to face- the whole external world for an instant, and then concentrated on you with an irresistible prejudice in your favor.”

ESFJ: “The bottle of whiskey- a second one- was now in constant demand by all present, excepting Catherine, who ‘felt just as good on nothing at all.’”

ENTJ: “The mouth was wide open and ripped at the corners, as though she had choked a little in giving up the tremendous vitality she had stored for so long.”

INTJ: ”Though I was curious to see her, I had no desire to meet her- but I did. I went up to New York.”

ISTJ: “he saw himself standing alone on the last barrier of civilization.”

ISTP: “’I am careful.’ 

‘No you’re not.’

‘Well, other people are.’”

ENFP: “Daisy began to sing with the music in a husky, rhythmic whisper, bringing out a meaning in each word that it had never had before and would never have again.”

ESTP: “They were at least agonizingly aware of the easy money in the vicinity and convinced it was theirs for a few words in the right key.” 

INFJ: “and for a second I thought I loved her. But I am slow-thinking and full of interior rules that act as breaks on my desires,”