I like bloodweave. Okay. But I DON'T like the version of them in fanfic where Astarion is a dick and Gale is like. Whining and pleading for him to be emotionally vulnerable (or just. Nice to him) prior to the relationship being established. Because that is just not accurate. Gale needs the player to express interest in him during his weave-teaching scene before he even considers hitting on them properly. Gale is entirely resigned to his fate and needs someone else to pull him away from it. Gale only starts being sweet and romantic and devoted after you accept his love confession and give him hope for the future. Gale says fuck all and then slinks away to cry privately if you break up with him.
Like he isn't chasing after people lmao. He isn't dropping to his knees and crying about anything much less this dickhead he met a week ago. He is overwhelmingly passive about literally everything personal to him up to and including his own death (provided there are no casualties/there is a good reason) until after the player expresses that they care about him. Astarion is not doing that in any of these fics.
Like Gale is friendly and a dork and doesn't wanna get murdered but he fully has a suicide plan. He thought the artefacts would help him survive but he didn't believe he'd ever truly live again. If Gale confessed and Astarion said/did like one (1) mean thing afterward Gale's romance is closed off forever. He's wandering into the forest to cry. He's killing himself immediately. His fragile ego and self worth can't take it. You have to understand that when we joke about him being pathetic it's not bc he's like. Sopping wet and chasing people down and begging for a scrap of attention. It's because he craves affection but would literally rather die than ask or even hope for it until someone else forces that hope back into his serotonin-deficient tadpole brain.
440 notes
·
View notes
Have you taken any pottery classes or were you entirely self taught? I REALLY want to get into it but classes are quite expensive
I took some sculpting in undergrad, but it was in the context of casting and mold-making, not ceramics. So I'm fairly comfortable with clay as a medium but not so much with clay as an end product--not being able to do armatures and having to think about firing is weird. (If I had the opportunity to do bronze casting again, though, I would, no hesitation.) That puts me in the minority of my current pottery peers, who are largely self-taught or only learned in our studio.
I do pottery now at a co-op studio space, and technically that means that I'm taking classes there--but the classes are more like guided lab time? There's not really assignments or anything, and there's only a couple other people who sculpt, none of whom are in my class. Mostly the class just means that the person in charge demonstrates a technique or two once a week and then lets us do our thing.
Personally I think that shared studio space is the absolute best way to go. You spend less in startup costs (kilns are EXPENSIVE, running kilns is expensive, glaze is expensive) and it plugs you directly in to a group of fellow artists who can help and support you at whatever skill level you're at. Yes, classes are expensive--my class is $250 per season. But for me that includes lab space, 50 lbs of clay per season, almost all of the glaze I use, kiln time, and other people doing all the maintenance and kiln loading/unloading etc. Very much money well spent.
Artist-run shared spaces are often not turning a profit on anything with studio fees, just covering operations costs, so while it's pricey, it generally is just...what it costs to do that hobby. And it is sooooo much easier to be motivated when you're going to what is, basically, Grown-Up Art Club.
But if costs are prohibitive for you to do pottery via classes, and you want to learn to sculpt, then get some polymer clay and see what you can do. It's a different game than actual clay, but form is form, and the medium is secondary to figuring out how to translate an idea into reality.
Polymer clay is relatively affordable and doesn't require nearly the infrastructure of ceramics. If you can't spend the money on classes or a shared studio, then polymer clay is a great way to develop technique and an eye so that when you're in a position to spend the money, you already have the skills to make it worth what you're spending.
286 notes
·
View notes
It's so interesting to me that Izzy's suicide attempt wound heals very slowly, and leaves a big visible scar, in a show where characters regularly shrug off much worse injuries. You can even see it under his drag makeup:
Injuries in OFMD seem to have a physical impact on the character more or less in proportion to their psychological impact, regardless of how serious the wound should realistically be. In S1E4, Stede spends one episode injured after getting stabbed and hanged due to his hubris and incompetence, but then he's fine after hanging out with Ed for a while and getting some validation. In S1E6, Stede spends an entire night impaled on a sword, but he doesn't even seem to be in pain and suffers no lasting damage because it's not a psychological wound. And of course, in S2E3, Ed comes back to life more or less physically intact after realizing that Stede is there waiting for him, even though he should have been very, very dead after what the crew did to him.
But all of Izzy's injuries have a realistic impact on his body, in a way that isn't the case for any other character. I think some of that can be attributed to his Only Human In A Muppet Movie status, but it's also because of his uniquely fucked up relationship with Ed.
Ed causes all of Izzy's injuries, and I think they affect Izzy so permanently because of how deeply invested and dependent Izzy is on his relationship with Ed; his whole sense of self is bound up in it. Those wounds represent the toxicity of their relationship and how much it's damaged Izzy.
In contrast, when Izzy shoots Ed in the arm, the wound doesn't seem to stick around; we never see any evidence of it after that moment. Ed's actions have a far deeper impact on Izzy than Izzy's actions have on Ed, because there's always been an inequality in their relationship; Izzy cares about Ed much more than Ed cares about him, and that's the fundamental problem for Izzy.
Izzy post S2E4 has made a deliberate decision to move on from what happened between him and Ed, because it was so big and so awful that it's not the kind of thing he could either just forgive or ignore. And I think his Ed-induced suicide attempt was kind of the final straw; it's after that that he goes on deck and shoots Ed, which David Jenkins has described as Izzy "breaking up" with him. I don't think Izzy's stopped being in love with Ed, but he's stopped trying to influence his behavior as much, or even spend much time with him at all, and he's spending time with other characters instead.
But for all his change in behavior, every time he's on screen, we get a visual reminder of what happened, in both his leg and the scar on his face. Both are emphatically visible in the above scene, when Izzy and Stede are talking about Ed. It's a reminder of the impetus for Izzy's character arc this season, his relationship with Ed, and I think it's an indication that he hasn't fully healed psychologically, and probably never will. All he can do is keep moving forward.
398 notes
·
View notes
okay very preliminary thoughts on mitski's new album BUT i think there's something with how "laurel hell" felt like a goodbye to the music industry (can't find the source but i remember reading that it was intended to be her last album under her contract) like i'm sorry anthony fantano but if you interpret the back half of "laurel hell" as being generic breakup songs you're missing like 80% of the context. to me TO ME it feels so clearly about her negotiating her relationship with fame, how she can't love her fans the way they love her, and how she feels like she sold her soul to her job, so the only thing to do is step away. but THEN "the land is inhospitable and so are we" was created after mitski decided to renegotiate her contract, specifically because she loved making music enough to deal with the negative aspects of the work. and then all the songs are about the ghost of love she can leave behind, despite the present pain or emptiness, and like. do you see it. do you see it.
359 notes
·
View notes
It's just... odd to me, I suppose, going from "what is in my pants is completely irrelevant to most anybody else's life" to the expectation that you must be completely open, essentially, about what is in your pants.
I think a lot of people understand the general idea of why it's bad decorum to demand people offer explanations for private information like this, but they don't analyze exactly why it's bad besides, "asking directly is just rude" and not "asking in any way still enforces the often violent nature of gender and sex, and putting people in the 'right box' is a part of that violence."
It's especially odd when seeing other trans people enforcing the idea that "what's in your pants?" is a genuine, good-faith basis for interacting with others.
192 notes
·
View notes
Oliver banks would be from either Portland or Seattle
but consider this with me. creole oliver banks. new orleans was MADE for the end imho
69 notes
·
View notes
Fig's line "I don't think I'm an artist, I think I'm just a good friend" has not left my head at all. Just...
You're Fig Faeth and your horns came in over the summer and you pick up the bard class as a form of adolescent rock 'n' roll rebellion, and it works! It's exactly the outlet you need! You give a guy you just met drumsticks and you start a band and it's good enough that within a year and a half you're touring. You are, in every sense, good at being a bard.
And then, finally, your junior year, you start to take it seriously. Your art goes from an outlet and a form of rebellion to a practice. A discipline. (Can rebellion exist within a discipline?) Your classmates know what they want to do with their work. They all have a thesis statement. And yeah, there's cohesion in the music you make, but you've never had to think about why you make it. You've never sat down and dissected what it is about bass that speaks to you. You've never poured over your lyrics to pick at any deeper meaning. Why should you? You don't play music for a grand design, you do it to... huh, why do you do it?
(Your art is the one form of self-expression that feels as safe as Disguise Self does, because even if you're pouring your heart onto the page and then screaming it in front of thousands of people, it's not like you're really making yourself known. You can sing I'm lonely, I'm scared, I'm furious, and your fans will sing it right back, and there will still be the distance between performer and audience to keep your heart safe.)
Now you're being asked to look inward to explain the artistic choices you're making, and you can't help but recoil at that, because you'd rather do anything than look inward. Meanwhile, your classmates have no problem with it, so you start to wonder if you're a real artist at all. Can your art be authentic if it only exists to bolster a thesis statement? Has your art been unauthentic this whole time because you've never really thought about a thesis statement before? Is that what makes it art, and not just the next track on somebody's teen angst playlist?
You can't think about yourself— acknowledging your own existence makes you want to puke. So if your music is an extension of yourself, (and it is, even if it's just because the spotlight reveals only what you want it to,) you can't think about your music. You can't. You have to. Your grade depends on it.
You're Fig Faeth, and you keep multiclassing because you'd rather be a good friend than a great artist. If introspection is what great art demands, then fuck it. You must not be a bard at all.
63 notes
·
View notes