Synaesthesis

RSS

phoebewilliamstv:

chartini:

avenging-sherl0ck:

productofcanada:

joceln:

canada looks really broken

image

u ok canada

We are slowly trying to distance ourselves from the US…piece by piece.

be free

image

Canada: “sorry eh” 

http://drakyndra.tumblr.com/post/95897834068/pitchercries-idhren-pyrrhiccomedy

pitchercries:

idhren:

pyrrhiccomedy:

pikestaff:

This town in Russia is called Zheleznogorsk.

Their flag and coat of arms is a bear splitting the atom.

image

That is all.

*kicks down door, knocks over end table, vase crashes to the floor*

No that is NOT all,…

agrippina-minor:

thetumblrofrassilon:

jtkeys:

sarah531:

upperleadworth:

lucrezianoin:

linnealurks:

doctorwho247:

10 years ago today, filming began on a brand new series of Doctor Who, starring Christopher Eccleston as the Ninth Doctor and Billie Piper as Rose Tyler!

can I passively aggressively point out the way the shot is set up to make both of them equal including cancelling out the height difference and you really couldn’t tell who was meant to be the main character by looking at this photo? (Because of course they’re both the main character and of equal importance rose tyler Ninth doctor (via pygmy-of-triviality)

Thank god now we have this!
[pictures snipped for length: they were this one, this one, this one, and this one]

Yep! You’re right! And we also have this:
[pictures snipped for length: they were this one, this one, this one, this one and this one]
^^^ Ten is literally shielding Donna. If this was Eleven and Amy, we would be seeing posts about how this shows how “the man is in charge and the woman cowers in fear”. But since it is Ten and Donna, nobody had mentioned it at all.
All of these promotional pictures cannot be used in a “this is sexist” argument. Both the RTD era and the Moffat era pictures have the exact same type of staging.
So if you are calling the Moffat era images sexist, then you are calling this picture of Ten and Donna sexist (which is ridiculous).

We also now have this (where Clara is centered, and her gaze meets the viewer more directly):

And this (where Clara again meets the viewer’s gaze confidently while the Doctor, in a fearful pose, does not):

And this (where the height difference - which is considerable!) is canceled out)

Like this one!

Okay, back to the RTD era. Guess what the promo image used on the Series Four DVD boxset (and loads of the other merchandise) was? Surely it wasn’t the one of Donna cowering behind the Doctor, looking afraid- the one where hardly any of this fabulous, loud character can even be seen?

Damn!
Well, at least there aren’t any promos of Rose where she’s stuck behind Nine as he protects her, right?

Damn again! (A similar version of the top right one appeared on the Series One box set, except that the Doctor was looking at the viewer, and Rose was not.)
Hey, I wonder what picture of Martha they used for the Series Three boxs-

Oh. (She is on the back, but only with the Doctor, and yes, people were rightly furious when that art was released.)
What about Amy? There isn’t a single promo picture where she looks like the Doctor’s equal!

Well, no, obviously. That was when Steven Moffat came in, and we all know that despite Doctor Who being an operation run by literally hundreds of people, he personally sat in on all the photo shoots and got them to nudge the female characters a little bit behind the Doctor.

Including the ones done by other magazines.
Okay, what have we got…? That’s six pictures from the Moffat era featuring a female character positioned as equal to or greater than her male counterpart, and five from the RTD era where she is not, plus one RTD one where she’s erased altogether.
The way female characters are positioned in images like this isn’t irrelevant - these are the images that end up on the merchandise, on lunchboxes and t-shirts, it’s important to have heroic female characters on these things. (And no, it isn’t the showrunner’s decision about what pictures end up on the cover of the Radio Times, for example.) That original picture of Rose and the Doctor in the TARDIS is nice, but I haven’t seen it on any of the merchandise, the children’s books, DVDs etc - the one I have seen is the one where the Doctor is standing in front of her protecting her. (That Nine and Rose photoshoot with Rose in the pink hoodie produced some other, lovely pictures, including one where the Doctor is staring at Rose while she looks at the viewer, but I never saw that one on any of the books or lunchboxes either.)
Some perspective/understanding of how images like this are actually taken and used would be nice, s’all I’m saying. And I still want to know who it was made the decision to leave Martha off the Series Three boxset.

Even the gorgeous special-edition steelbook of Series Four features Donna hidden almost entirely behind the Doctor, looking scared:

I dislike these kinds of promo shots, but the Moffat era sure doesn’t have a monopoly on them.

THANK YOU for this.

Can I just, as a short woman, point out that this “cancelling the height difference makes them equal” thing makes me itchy?  I know it’s all about visuals, and the first impression that hits the viewer, but dammit, I’m shorter than most men, and I’m still their equal. 

agrippina-minor:

thetumblrofrassilon:

jtkeys:

sarah531:

upperleadworth:

lucrezianoin:

linnealurks:

doctorwho247:

10 years ago today, filming began on a brand new series of Doctor Who, starring Christopher Eccleston as the Ninth Doctor and Billie Piper as Rose Tyler!

can I passively aggressively point out the way the shot is set up to make both of them equal including cancelling out the height difference and you really couldn’t tell who was meant to be the main character by looking at this photo? (Because of course they’re both the main character and of equal importance rose tyler Ninth doctor (via pygmy-of-triviality)

Thank god now we have this!

[pictures snipped for length: they were this one, this one, this one, and this one]

Yep! You’re right! And we also have this:

[pictures snipped for length: they were this one, this one, this one, this one and this one]

^^^ Ten is literally shielding Donna. If this was Eleven and Amy, we would be seeing posts about how this shows how “the man is in charge and the woman cowers in fear”. But since it is Ten and Donna, nobody had mentioned it at all.

All of these promotional pictures cannot be used in a “this is sexist” argument. Both the RTD era and the Moffat era pictures have the exact same type of staging.

So if you are calling the Moffat era images sexist, then you are calling this picture of Ten and Donna sexist (which is ridiculous).

We also now have this (where Clara is centered, and her gaze meets the viewer more directly):

And this (where Clara again meets the viewer’s gaze confidently while the Doctor, in a fearful pose, does not):

And this (where the height difference - which is considerable!) is canceled out)

image

Like this one!

image

Okay, back to the RTD era. Guess what the promo image used on the Series Four DVD boxset (and loads of the other merchandise) was? Surely it wasn’t the one of Donna cowering behind the Doctor, looking afraid- the one where hardly any of this fabulous, loud character can even be seen?

Damn!

Well, at least there aren’t any promos of Rose where she’s stuck behind Nine as he protects her, right?

image

Damn again! (A similar version of the top right one appeared on the Series One box set, except that the Doctor was looking at the viewer, and Rose was not.)

Hey, I wonder what picture of Martha they used for the Series Three boxs-

Oh. (She is on the back, but only with the Doctor, and yes, people were rightly furious when that art was released.)

What about Amy? There isn’t a single promo picture where she looks like the Doctor’s equal!

image

Well, no, obviously. That was when Steven Moffat came in, and we all know that despite Doctor Who being an operation run by literally hundreds of people, he personally sat in on all the photo shoots and got them to nudge the female characters a little bit behind the Doctor.

image

Including the ones done by other magazines.

Okay, what have we got…? That’s six pictures from the Moffat era featuring a female character positioned as equal to or greater than her male counterpart, and five from the RTD era where she is not, plus one RTD one where she’s erased altogether.

The way female characters are positioned in images like this isn’t irrelevant - these are the images that end up on the merchandise, on lunchboxes and t-shirts, it’s important to have heroic female characters on these things. (And no, it isn’t the showrunner’s decision about what pictures end up on the cover of the Radio Times, for example.) That original picture of Rose and the Doctor in the TARDIS is nice, but I haven’t seen it on any of the merchandise, the children’s books, DVDs etc - the one I have seen is the one where the Doctor is standing in front of her protecting her. (That Nine and Rose photoshoot with Rose in the pink hoodie produced some other, lovely pictures, including one where the Doctor is staring at Rose while she looks at the viewer, but I never saw that one on any of the books or lunchboxes either.)

Some perspective/understanding of how images like this are actually taken and used would be nice, s’all I’m saying. And I still want to know who it was made the decision to leave Martha off the Series Three boxset.

Even the gorgeous special-edition steelbook of Series Four features Donna hidden almost entirely behind the Doctor, looking scared:

I dislike these kinds of promo shots, but the Moffat era sure doesn’t have a monopoly on them.

THANK YOU for this.

Can I just, as a short woman, point out that this “cancelling the height difference makes them equal” thing makes me itchy?  I know it’s all about visuals, and the first impression that hits the viewer, but dammit, I’m shorter than most men, and I’m still their equal. 

Embarrassing fandom confession

agrippina-minor:

I … don’t really care about Wonder Woman.

I mean, I think she needs a movie yesterday, and I’ll probably see it when it comes out, but I just can’t click with the character.

It’s mostly the costume. Like, she’s meant to be this figure of pseudo-Greek myth, but her costume owes more to the…

Yep. This has always been my problem with Diana too. Alas.

Aug 9

In Defense of Mr. Godfrey Norton, Esq. by Rebecca J. Anderson

adleresque-infinite:

"To Sherlock Holmes she is always the woman." Admittedly, it is a striking phrase; and for those who admire the great detective but cannot help feeling wistful that he never fell in love, an uncommonly tempting one. Upon this somewhat fragile foundation a thousand dream-castles have been built linking Holmes and Irene Adler romantically — even the respected Sherlockian scholar William S. Baring-Gould could not resist. So it is not surprising that an imagined affair between the two should make its way into a great many critical essays and pastiches, as well.

Unfortunately, one man stands in the way of this conjectured bliss: Irene’s husband, Godfrey Norton. To those who wish to reunite Holmes with the woman he most admired, Mr. Norton is an irritating obstacle. As a result, a disturbing trend has emerged in pastiches featuring Holmes and Irene: when our hero and heroine meet at last, she generally gives some speech about what a cad Godfrey turned out to be and how she was forced to divorce him (or he callously divorced her). Alternatively, Mr. Norton was found to be in poor health, or met with some horrid accident, and died only a year or two after the marriage.

Poor Godfrey! What has he done to deserve the hatred of so many authors? Is it his fault that Irene preferred the known to the unknown, the robust and handsome lawyer to the hawkish and skeletal detective, a man who loved her unreservedly to a man who sneered at the thought of romance?

Let us put aside prejudice a moment, and consider only the details of Godfrey’s person and character revealed in the canon. He is dark, handsome (indeed “remarkably” so, according to Holmes), aquiline and mustachioed — a perfect example of a Victorian romantic hero. He is a well-established and respectable lawyer of the Inner Temple (we shall leave aside all the obvious jokes about lawyers; the canon does not encourage such prejudices). He appears impetuous and somewhat excitable, but he does not forget his manners: he pays his cabmen well, and thanks the shabbily disguised Holmes after the wedding. No one in the story speaks ill of him, and in Irene’s considered estimation, he is a “better man” than the King of Bohemia.

Consider how Godfrey acquitted himself in this tale: for love of Irene, he was willing to cast away his place in the Inner Temple, his respectable position in British society, and accompany her to the continent, never to return. What must that have cost him? Yet once he learned that Sherlock Holmes was working for the King of Bohemia, and that Irene was in danger of further persecution, he did not hesitate.

"We both thought,” says Irene in her letter (emphasis mine), “the best recourse was flight…” Godfrey was not some innocent, kept in the dark while Irene schemed to bring about the King’s downfall; he knew what was going on, and his sympathies were all with Irene. She had, in his estimation, indeed been “cruelly wronged”, and had every right to retain the incriminating picture for her own protection.

Yet Godfrey, though trained as a lawyer, is never permitted to defend Irene, or himself. The case is all for the prosecution. Nevertheless, Irene loves him, and is loved by him, and declares herself to be satisfied. Sherlock Holmes recognized, and respected, Irene’s intelligence: he did not seem inclined to dispute her judgment in the matter. Why, then, should we?

In order to dismiss G. Norton, Esq. as a cad, we must conclude that despite a lengthy acquaintance with the gentleman, Irene lacked the perception and foresight to see that he would be a poor husband. For some reason, her formidable powers of observation and reason failed her. Also, we must find some base and selfish motive for Godfrey to have given up his career and his place in British society to accompany Irene — a motive neither supplied or implied by anyone in SCAN, not even Holmes.

It is, of course, possible that Mr. Norton did meet with some tragic accident, or succumbed to some virulent disease, and left Irene a young and eligible widow. But surely it smacks of wishful thinking? Besides, Irene had already had one chance: she knew of Holmes, even met Holmes (albeit in disguise), but consciously chose to put her affections elsewhere.

Those who know Holmes best cannot help but acknowledge his flaws, and although their acquaintance was brief, Irene Adler surely noted some of them herself. He had, after all, behaved in a less than gentlemanly fashion toward her, deceiving and manipulating her into betraying the location of her only safeguard against the King of Bohemia. Irene’s courtesy and goodwill in her final letter to Holmes was surely more than he deserved under the circumstances, and evidence that she was, indeed, a woman of distinction. But that charmingly polite leave-taking is where her relationship with Holmes must, from any practical or logical point of view, end.

Is there any sensible reason why Irene Adler should have rejected Mr. Norton’s suit, so honestly and commendably offered, and thrown herself at the unlikely and unoffered prospect of a liaison with Sherlock Holmes? Surely not. Therefore, while our affection for Holmes may lead us to wish that he had found happiness with a woman worthy of his admiration, should we not honor Irene’s choice nonetheless, and allow her a happy marriage to a man worthy of her love?

— (c) Rebecca J. Anderson 1996 

This article was reprinted with permission of the author, Rebecca J. Anderson, and previously appeared here:

http://kspot.org/holmes/godfrey.htm

You can find her Tumblr here: http://rj-anderson.tumblr.com/

I composed this essay in the full throes of Sherlockian geekdom, a phase of mine which lasted about five years in which I read and re-read the Canon, essays about the Canon, and every pastiche I could get my hands on, participated eagerly in HOUNDS-L and the Mary Russell spinoff RUSS-L, and wrote about six chapters of a novel about a college-aged Sherlock entitled The Case of the Winning Woman.

I’m not sure exactly when I stopped being obsessed with All Things Sherlock, but it was probably around the time I became obsessed with All Things Harry Potter instead. (My latent fondness for Sherlockiana still managed to outlive my interest in Potterdom, though, so there’s that.)

Aug 7

You see, the reasons - which are very important - are the causes behind this. That’s because there are things that make it so we can’t do this, like reasons. As we said, the reasons, are very important. It’s almost like there are obstacles ahead of us, which there aren’t, but it’s AS IF there are. So we can’t do it, because of the important reasons and the obstacles, which are imaginary, but scary like dreams.

- Anyone from Marvel (ever) on why they aren’t making a film starring a female superhero (ever). (via westerlingss)

(Source: inkasrain)

Aug 4

vambrace:

Hey there! So, you may have seen these body pillows around. You may have thought, “Wow, I sure want one of those.” Well good news! I take commissions for these cuddly lil nuggets!

THE SQUIDS:
Each squid is handmade with love from fleece, cotton, and felt, and stuffed with hypoallergenic 100% polyester filling.

SIZES:
Two sizes are available: an 8-foot body pillow, and a 4-foot cuddle buddy or travel pillow.

COLORS:
I can find just about any color, within reason. I am limited by what the fabric store has to offer, but the selection is great, so I can try my hardest to get the exact color you want.

UNDERSIDE PATTERNS:
Again, I am limited by what the fabric store has to offer, but I can find just about any pattern from paisley to polka dots in nearly any color. If you wish, you can request that I choose an underside for you based on the main color you choose.

OTHER OPTIONS:
I can fit the squids with an eye color, if you so desire. If not specified, your squid will come with traditional black and white eyes.
Also, three different highlights are available for your squid: original (photos 4 and 5), circles (photos 6 and 8), or crescent (photo 7). If not specified, your squid will come with original highlights.
Additionally, you may request the firmness of your pillow. There are three firmness options: firm, regular, or what I call squishy. If not specified, your squid will come with regular firmness.

PRICES:
Large squids are $75 (shipping not included) and small squids are $40 (shipping not included). Shipping will be $20 nationwide. International shipping is available, and those shipping prices can be viewed here.

HOW TO ORDER:
It’s easy! Just email me at tentacle.club@gmail.com with the following information:

Color
Underside color and pattern
Size
Shipping Information
Eye color (optional)
Eye highlight (optional)
Firmness (optional)

I will reply to your message with the email address you’ll send money to via PayPal. If you would rather send a check or money order, I will provide you with that information at your request.

OTHER INFO:
Please know that these squids are not made in a pet-free home; if you are allergic to cats please be aware that despite my efforts to keep them away from my cat, he still might have sat on the fabric while I wasn’t looking. Also note that these are made with FLEECE; if you have a fleece allergy, please do not buy these pillows. The filling of the pillows is guaranteed hypoallergenic BY THE COMPANY, NOT BY ME. If it turns out you have an allergy to the stuffing, sue them, not me. I am not responsible for any injuries that happen from your enjoyment with my pillows.

Thank you all so much for the support so far! I hope you consider purchasing one of my squids, I have a 100% satisfaction rate so far. And please, spread the word!

espybounce:

lepreas:

framesjanco:

wine tastes so bad. I’m convinced the whole world is in on an inside joke together trying to persuade me that wine tastes good to them. there’s no way any one can like the taste of it. it’s like bug spray. the whole frickin world pretends to like bug spray. I don’t understand why. stop the madness

wine is an acquired taste. if you don’t like it, acquire some taste

THIS. I have tried wine more times than I can count and it still tastes like bug spray to me.

See also: coffee (only that tastes like somebody emptied an ashtray into a cup instead).

agrippina-minor:

beifongnation:

TUMBLR GIVEAWAY! #LIZFORLINZIN

Hello Linzin and Beifans! 

Surprise! I wrote a comic book and I need your help spreading the word! 

Over the past two months amiraink (cover) and savvyseverine (interior) have worked their fingers to the bone creating the art in support of my story. I plan on presenting this one-of-a-kind comic to Bryke this weekend in the hopes of it getting picked up as a series! But I can’t do it without you!

Here’s How To Win: 

1. Follow BeifongNation and reblog this post as often as you can (minimum once a day), between now and July 31st with the tag “LizforLinzin” 

2. Follow BeifongNation on Twitter and let it be known that you want a Lin and Tenzin comic - use #lizforlinzin. Tweet using #lizforlinzin as much as you can (minimum once a day) between now and July 31st. 

5 followers will be rewarded with a copy of my limited edition fan-made Linzin comic book! Thank you so much for your help! It means more to me than I can say. 

*Keep your ask box open! Winners will be messaged on August 1st! 

Okay, this looks amazing, and I am wholly in favour of fan comics and works in general, but for the love of God, don’t give your fanworks to creators.

…actually, lemme clarify: don’t give your fanfic to creators.  (And that includes fan comics.)  Art is traditionally okay, but anything with a storyline is off-limits.  Novelist rj-anderson, herself an author of fic, discusses the reasons here.  Basically it boils down to the risk that, if an author is known to have read a fan work, and later uses an idea that featured in that fan work, they’re liable to be sued.

Would that stand up in court?  No one knows, because authors and TV networks tend to run screaming into the night from the prospect, or at least rolling over and paying out a lot of money.  Back in the ’90s, J. Michael Straczynski of Babylon 5 ditched a whole script after he saw a post on Usenet speculating about the very idea at the centre of the unfilmed episode.  Boards and groups frequented by Terry Pratchett had rules forbidding fic and even speculation based on this possibility.  

Star Trek: The Next Generation, DS9 and Voyager were basically the only shows in Hollywood that accepted scripts from members of the public, and that involved heavy duty waivers.  And even then, I’m fairly certain there was at least one episode where they had to pay a fan money and give him a credit, because an idea he had suggested eventually made its way into an episode.  

Once Voyager ended, the days when fans could submit work to a franchise were basically gone, and creators pulled way back from fandom.  Now, with social media, they’re with us again, but the only fanworks they’re free to consume are visual.  

Now, Bryke are super fan friendly, but the only fan comic they’re known to have read was Rufftoon’s Zhao of the Water Tribe, and that was when Johane Matte was working for them.  The fans who have gone on to contribute to the comics — Gene Luen Yang, Faith Erin Hicks and others — had established careers as artists and freelancers — they’ve all produced original work and have established reputations for professional behaviour, meeting deadlines, etc. 

So basically, the chances of this enabling anyone to professionally contribute to the Avatar franchise are slim.  Much slimmer than the possibility of scaring Bryke away from any plans they might have for Linzin prequels.  By all means, show Bryke the artwork, show them portfolios and original writing samples, but please, not the fan comic.

(I hope this hasn’t come across as arrogant or patronising — I’ve just been in fandom for a long time, and I know how badly wrong this can go.)

My take-away with this was actually “BRYKE READ ZHAO OF THE WATER TRIBE? THAT IS SO AWESOME!”

But yeah, what agrippina-minor said (and what she said I said, because I definitely said it). :)

tanaudel:

gessorly:

carminagf:

Beauty and the Beast. 1904. John D. Batten 

stg I thought that was a sloth for a minute, with the lady having a Kristen Bell sloth-joy meltdown. Beauty and the Sloth.

It’s not a sloth?! 

tanaudel:

gessorly:

carminagf:

Beauty and the Beast. 1904. John D. Batten 

stg I thought that was a sloth for a minute, with the lady having a Kristen Bell sloth-joy meltdown. Beauty and the Sloth.

It’s not a sloth?!