#all these are screencaps I stole from the internet | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

monsterblogging · 1 month

Text

How Pacific Rim gives the finger to the Catholic Church

Another interesting thing that many people miss about Pacific Rim is that it has some... things to say about religion, especially the Catholic Church. It can be easy to miss because it's not all spelled out for you, but once you see it, you'll never unsee it.

First, let's take a look at Raleigh's speech from the beginning of the film:

There are things you can't fight, acts of God. You see a hurricane coming, you have to get out of the way. But when you're in a Jaeger, suddenly, you can fight the hurricane. You can win.

This speech here establishes that when you fight kaiju, you aren't just fighting monsters. You're defying God himself.

"You're reading too much into it!" some of you might say. "'Act of God' is just a legal term for massive disasters."

Ah, but I'm not reading too much into it. Because this line was originally found in the draft script, which was way more explicit in linking the Precursors with the divine.

In the draft script, the Precursors aren't just some random alien invaders. They're actually the creators of our universe, and we're just a pesky little accident that happened on the planet they want to live on.

The character of Ivo Czerny, who had drifted with a kaiju brain, was given this dialog:

I looked into the abyss. I’d been infected with the truth -- that this is the end of us. We are the vermin of the gods. There’s no point in putting up a fight…

A different character, Commander Kaz Takada, says:

We call the enemy the Precursors… I may as well tell the world the gods want us dead.

The character of Newt Gotlieb is given this dialog:

I don't care if they are the creators of the universe. I like the universe.

And I'm not a creationist.

So, Raleigh's line wasn't just a careless reference to a legal term. It was introducing the story's thesis.

In the final version of the film, we don't have all of this explicit dialog. And yet, the sentiment is still there. How do we know this? For one thing, the Precursors are modeled on Catholic clergy. Pacific Rim: Man, Machines, & Monsters, quotes Guillermo del Toro as saying:

We gave the Precursors elements of ecclesiastical royalty, dividing them into cardinals and bishops.

Fun fact: If we go to the old Art of Pacific Rim page on The Internet Archive and check the filenames, we can see that this Precursor - the one who stares up at Lady Danger as it goes 'splodey - is a Precursor Bishop.

(Screencaps from quiteunlikely.net)

Further establishing the link between the Precursors and the Catholic Church are the costumes of the BuenaKai nuns:

(Screencap from movie-screencaps.com)

A better picture of the costume can be found on PropstoreAuction. If you want to see the whole thing, go there; because I'm going to crop it because the whole thing's pretty big. Anyway, you can see that their costumes include cornettes and stoles.

(By the way, there are also kaiju monks. This isn't a girls-only club like the Netflix cartoon would have you think.)

Now, forget everything you know about Uprising or The Black, and consider all of this in the context of the anti-authority themes in Guillermo del Toro's other work. This casts the nature of the Precursors and the hivemind in a somewhat different light than many of us are used to. These aren't just scary aliens. This is a civilization built on ideals of rigid hierarchy and total dominion. And they're also essentially theocrats.

What's also really interesting is that when you take all of this together, it means that the kaiju spiritualists aren't actually wrong in regarding the kaiju as divine beings sent by the gods. They're just assholes for aligning themselves with a malefic divine.

#pacific rim #pacific rim 2013 #pacific rim lore #pacific rim is not for chuds or bootlickers #pacific rim is not for christofascists #precursors

21 notes · View notes

outlanderfandomfollies · 3 years

Photo

This post was submitted by Anonymous:

Hi, I’m happy to see you tackling the Ross Morrell stories because it drives me mad when people take these datalounge trolls at face value. I have been doing my own investigating, searching for Ross and Ivan stuff from when it happened, and submitted the above post with a tweet to one of the blogs discussing the RM rumor. I want to pass this on to you so you can address it.

It shows that before Ross was Ross, his account had a different name! I hope the photos are clear enough, but in 2012 “Ivette Kinski” responded to a tweet and when the name was changed to Ross years later with a new pic it was apparently still in his tweet history!

Meokeob was willfully ignoring this and pretending it meant that Ross had been around since 2012, and he was but with a whole different personality.

I don’t know if this is allowed so cross it all out if you have to, but to demonstrate how it appears to work and how long troll accounts can hang around, I looked at the notorious datalounge troll Arwen and you can see her old tweet responses to tweets with her old name now show up with her current account name and pic, just like Ross and Ivette. Thank you for reading!

____________________________________

Response by Outlander Fandom Follies:

Thanks for your submission Anon!

As you can see, I didn’t “cross it all out,” but I didn’t post the screeencap with the two detailed comments by a certain blogger because I didn’t feel comfortable doing so.

It seems clear to me that “Ross Morrell” is a made up sock account. I would guess now that “Ross” stole an obscure Czech actor’s (Ivan L.’s) image and used it as a profile photo and then made up the “Ross” name.

You definitely proved Anon that the name on the account was originally “Ivette Kinski.” She appears to have been a minor film producer based on the above screencap. However, “Ivette” was probably also a pseudonym because aside from the IMDb profile from years ago, she has no other Internet presence.

This may have been an old dormant account of “Ivette’s” that she later revived to use as a sock account. Either that or a friend or family member hijacked the account and used it as a sock account.

But whoever it was, they had an ax to grind. And yes, I think the entire story was made up to try to hurt S, or why use a sock account?

And I would guess it was a woman, if it wasn’t “Ivette” herself. But again, who knows? With sock accounts one never knows.

[Updated 02.25.21]

11 notes · View notes

tjkiahgb · 5 years

Text

Episode Recap: 3.19, “A Moving Day”

Can you believe we only have 50 or so minutes of content left with this show?

I want to love every single one of them and not take any for granted. Each minute feels truly precious.

Never mind.

Folks... we got ourselves a Toast-Off!

Cyrus has brought Jonah, Buffy, and Andi together to make toast. I wish I had more here, but that’s the extent of it.

Jonah presents his toast first. It’s burnt.

Andi says toasters are the trickiest appliance in the kitchen, which is true. Sure, anybody can figure out how to put the bread in, but when it comes time to select between the settings of Light, Medium, and Dark, too many people just twist the dial all the way past dark to Burnt to a Crisp. Avoid that setting. That’s where most people get tripped up.

Jonah advises Cyrus to not eat his burnt bread, and Cyrus agrees.

Buffy presents her toast, which is more like the concept of toast.

Buffy claims it wasn’t fair because Jonah was using the toaster. To think, if only Jonah had used the toaster less, both he and Buffy could’ve made decent toast and been in the running to win... I don’t know, something. I really don’t know what we’re doing here.

Anyway, because Jonah sabotaged both his and Buffy’s chance to win the Toast-Off, Andi can walk away with the competition if she’s just made a piece of non-ruined toast.

And, of course, Andi went extra and made some kind of toast chicken coop.

Seems like an easy win, but Cyrus can’t declare it thus until he’s had a taste.

He thinks it’s pretty good, but there’s a flavor on it he can’t place. What is that, he asks.

Cyrus spits it out as Jonah and Buffy chuckle about one of their friends almost poisoning their other friend.

I guess it was only right to get one last random cold open in before the show ended. Here’s to the nonsense cold opens: the Toast-Offs, the extended oral hygiene montages, the projects for school about eggs, the bad coffees made, the phone chargers stolen, the games of Scrabble played, the times the Mack family argued about what to eat or what to watch or who stole clothes from whom. Oh, random nonsense cold opens, you were always... there, and we shall sometimes remember you.

49 or so minutes left. Each one from here on out? Truly precious.

At Celia’s, Celia has gathered her family around to do an aggressively large jigsaw puzzle.

Frankly, I’m a bit worried for her. This puzzle size is the type you buy when you want to make a statement: No, I don’t have anything better to do and no, I don’t plan on leaving the house for the next week! This puzzle is my life now.

Bex comes walking in, finishing a phone conversation. She tells the family she won something. The family guesses what she won, but they don’t come anywhere close to the right answer, which is a free meal cooked by famous chef Raoul Ricci. No one’s heard of Raoul Ricci, not even Celia, which you might think would tip them off that something’s afoot here, but no one seems interested in digging for the truth.

Even a quick Google search would’ve told them that something was wrong, as it seems the only known Raoul Ricci is an Italian dentist.

Or, as they call them in Rome, a dentista.

Anyway, Bex explains, through a long and bewildering story, Raoul Ricci was famous and had restaurants, but then he didn’t want to have restaurants anymore, so he left to be a hermit.

Andi’s like...

...oh, can we keep him?

Bex explains the prize is that he’s going to cook for them. They just have to go out into the forest and find him. Once they do, though, he’s going to make them the meal of a lifetime.

I can’t stress enough how shady this sounds. There’s a 75% chance this ends with Raoul Ricci chasing the Macks through the woods in some kind of “Most Dangerous Game” type scenario.

Bowie and Andi are in. Celia’s like, this sounds like an awful pain.

Bex warns her if she doesn’t go, the whole family is going to “rhapsodize” about this meal forever. Quick question: where does Bex get off? Just dropping rhapsodize in a sentence like that? Who does she think she is? I’m offended for Celia and I’m offended for us.

Celia is still not interested, despite the threats of rhapsodization, so Bex turns to Andi and Bowie for help. They basically say they’re not going to do puzzle-time with Celia unless she goes with them to the woods, so she relents, with one condition.

A puzzle so big it causes you mental anguish just thinking about it. It ain’t a real puzzle unless your fingers are bleeding by the end.

Meanwhile, Cyrus, Buffy, and Jonah walk around, somewhere, and talk about that “thing” they all have tomorrow. Jonah’s worried he won’t be able to make the thing because his family is moving. Cyrus and Buffy agree to help him move, but Jonah asks Buffy if she will be able to, given her foot and all.

Buffy’s like, of course I can...

Okay, but I’m pretty sure a strong gust of wind could lift Cyrus. I would require stronger proof. Jonah, however, doesn’t need to see more than that minor show of strength, and agrees to let them help.

The next day, the Mack family is all loaded up in Celia’s SUV that we’re seeing for the first time this entire series in the penultimate episode. Celia goes through a long series of things to get ready to leave: moving seats, checking mirrors, putting on gloves, searching for sunglasses. It’s agonizing.

Eventually Celia puts on her suit of knight armor and night-vision goggles and chugs an entire large coffee and she’s ready to operate a motor vehicle.

I do want to warn her though, she should make sure all those production lights and reflectors are moved out of the way before she starts driving.

Wouldn’t want to run over one of the crew members.

Celia drives off. They head for the mountains.

And in a hurry, too. Celia seems to be doing at least 80 on these winding mountain roads.

Me? I’d be worried about ice or sudden hazards or taking a turn too fast, but I guess the Macks trust Celia’s driving ability more than I trust my own.

The Macks all sing songs and make jokes and-- OH MY GOD!

LOOK OUT FOR THAT BUS!

THEY’RE BOTH DOING 70 ON A TWO LANE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND HEADING RIGHT FOR EACH OTHER!

IS EVERY DRIVER IN THIS TOWN MAD?!

The family survives that hairpin turn, though, and makes it up to Mount Washington, named, of course, after America’s most famous obelisk.

Bex leads them onto the trail at Panther’s Hollow, which naturally leads Celia to ask if there are panthers around. Bowie’s like, no, no. Well, maybe one.

And then he scares the hell out of an already nervous elderly woman.

Everyone has a good laugh about it and they set off walking to find the hermit.

Then we get about twelve minutes of footage of the Mack family walking through the woods. I’m not going to include screencaps. I’m just adding that for posterity’s sake.

Over at the storage unit the Beck family rented to put all their stuff in, Cyrus and Buffy help Jonah move said stuff into trucks.

Cyrus comes across a crate of old VHS tapes and DVDs and screams when he sees their contents.

He calls Buffy over to show her.

It’s Judy Bartholomew!

Who’s Judy Bartholomew? She’s an old workout video lady who became a meme. Cyrus feels like he has to show Buffy the video, so he pulls out his phone.

They both have a good laugh about it. Cyrus is surprised to learn she’s real. He’s like, I can’t believe how big a fan Jonah’s mom is. She must be to have the entire Judy Bart collection like this.

Then Jonah’s mom shows up and she’s like, hey Jojobear, can I finally meet your friends? The ones you’ve been good friends with for like a year and a half now and that you won’t let me be around for some reason?

She walks over to Cyrus and Buffy who are shocked to see the Judy Bartholomew standing right in front of them.

Jonah’s like, yeah, it’s her.

Honestly, I’m impressed Jonah’s been able to hide his mom from his friends for this long. Did they never hang out around his family? Did she never come to pick him up from some place?

And doesn’t she wonder who his friends are? When he’d talk about the stuff they’d done together, would she just sit there going, “Oh, that sounds nice, Jonah. Sure would like to meet some of your friends one of these days.” And would Jonah be like, “Uh huh, yeah, you should,” and then he’d just continue putting it off for 15 months? Just kept kicking that can down the road?

Anyway, I still appreciate the show broaching this subject. Media so often lacks in representation of children whose parents have become internet memes.

Back out in the woods, the Macks walk through the woods. All but Bex grow restless. They ask her for proof that she knows where she’s going, like a map.

This doesn’t make them feel comforted.

Bowie pulls Bex aside and asks her what’s really going on. Bex is like, you trust me, right? Bowie says of course. Bex is like, okay, good, back into the forest we go and she walks off.

Bowie tells Andi and Celia it will all be worth it, like a liar, and they start another walking through the woods montage. Bex carries Andi. Bowie carries Celia.

This episode has more characters carrying other characters than any other episode the show has done.

Back at the storage unit, Judy Bart teaches Cyrus and Buffy how to trot.

She’s doing like this locomotion move, very simple.

Cyrus is like, AM I DOING IT?!

As he twists his body back and forth and throws his arms out.

Like, no, man. You can’t tell that what you’re doing is nothing like what Judy is doing? That it’s like, almost the opposite of what she’s doing?

Judy tells Jonah to show them how to do it, so Jonah steps up and does a whole dance routine that I’m also not sure is what Judy was doing.

But it looked good and had a nice finish, so whatever.

Jonah says he’s been doing that since he was six and it’s permanently ingrained in his head now like so many childhood scars.

Then Judy’s like, hey, didn’t you kids have to be in the mountains right about now? And they’re like, oh yeah, we have to get changed and get to the mountains, so they leave her in the storage unit.

Speaking of the mountains, the Macks find rocks.

They collapse on the rocks.

Bex is like, no, don’t sit on rocks now! We almost made it. The family doesn’t want to believe her, but she convinces them it’s true. She leads them around the bend where they find a fancy set up and...

Cyrus?

You see, Cyrus, for three years now, has been posing as celebrity chef Raoul Ricci and sneaking off to the mountains to prepare three course meals for random tourists.

No, wait.

Buffy appears from out of nowhere and this whole thing reeks of a setup.

How in the world did these two get up here so fast from the storage facility? Helicopter?

Andi’s like, what is going on? Where is the hermit I was promised?

Bex tells everyone there’s no hermit. This was all made up to trick everyone into going to the mountains. Bowie asks why.

Bowie’s like, oh, is that back on?

Cyrus and Buffy bring them rings and flowers.

Bowie’s says finally and they embrace.

They all head for a gazebo.

Jonah plays Bowie’s song, “You Girl”, on the guitar.

Andi walks Bex to Bowie.

The two take each other’s hands as the officiant begins doing his officianting.

Where did he come from, too? Did Jonah and Buffy and Cyrus ride up here with him? Carpool?

The wedding goes as weddings do. You know, rings and stuff. Bex and Bowie are about to kiss when--

Everyone looks around trying to figure out whose phone that is before Andi realizes it’s hers. She shuts it off and the music and kissing starts again.

They complete the kiss this time.

Bex is like, I know... it’s been a lot. Thanks for not fleeing.

Later, Bex and Bowie delight in calling each other husband and wife. Everyone is sort of shocked it actually finally happened.

The Mack family (the ones we’re still counting) share a hug.

That night, Cyrus shows Andi the Judy Bart videos and then he brags that they spent the day with her. Jonah says he introduced her to them. Andi doesn’t believe he knows her, but Jonah’s like, yeah, I do.

Andi’s stunned. She feels bad, but, in fairness to Andi, it’s super weird that Jonah kept her hidden this long anyway, especially from Andi of all people. She couldn’t be expected to make that guess.

Jonah’s like, don’t feel bad, the whole thing is funny. He used to be embarrassed about it but he’s over it. Andi says she can’t wait to meet her. And then they talk about meeting Jonah’s dad. Buffy makes a joke about his dad being one of the hairy guys from the workout video and Jonah’s like, yeah, he is.

Everyone sits around thinking about this for a second before they all decide Jonah’s joking.

He’s not.

I don’t know what makes them think Jonah has suddenly acquired a subtle sense of humor. Jonah’s idea of jokes are jump scaring Andi and “S’less.” You really think he’s got a level of clever beneath all that that he’s been hiding for a year and a half as if it was his mother?

Jonah leaves without saying another word.

Can I just take a quick second to try to piece together the history of the Beck family, because I find it fascinating.

So, sometime in the 1980s/early 1990s (I assume based on the fashion), Judy Bartholomew makes it big as a workout video star. Jonah’s father, Mr. Beck, is hired at some point to be a background guy in one of her videos.

I assume this is where they meet and fall in love. Later, they get married and have Jonah.

In the years that follow, Jonah’s dad undergoes a full-body transformation, getting buff and changing hairstyles and retires from the workout video business to coach little league, and, I guess, control the finances of the Judy Bartholomew workout empire.

Eventually, Jonah’s dad invests the Judy Bartholomew fortune unwisely, and the family loses their house, and they’re homeless until very recently when he gets a new job. Doing what? I have no idea. I can’t begin to assume what his area of expertise is.

I guess my question is this: does any child in this town have a quiet, average family? Buffy’s mom spends half her life in foreign countries doing work for the military and Buffy’s family is still somehow the most normal of the group’s.

Later, Andi wanders off from the group and checks her phone. That call earlier? It was from SAVA.

The school left her a voicemail. Andi listens to it and gets sad, but I don’t think in the “rejected from a school” way.

Plus, I don’t think schools call you just to tell you to screw off. “Hi, this is Caroline from SAVA. Is this Andi Mack? Okay, great. Just calling to tell you you weren’t good enough to get into our school. Have a nice evening.”

Bex and Bowie sneak up on Andi and scare her.

God, this poor girl must live in constant fear. Why is everyone always doing this to her?

As the episode ends, Bex and Bowie talk about how happy they are right now. Andi says she is, too.

Though, as TJ would say, “Tell your face.”

Speaking of TJ...

Aww, this is the last time I get to be excited about seeing TJ in the scenes from the next episode.

One more to go, people. One more.

#Andi Mack #Cyrus Goodman #Buffy Driscoll #Jonah Beck #Bex Mack #Celia Mack #Bowie Quinn #Judy Bartholomew #Dr. Raoul Ricci DDS.#episode recaps

313 notes · View notes

migleefulmoments · 5 years

Note

Debunking ahead: Tinhats historically believe Darren was FreePavarotti (mleigh69*tumblr*com/post/126280604185/why-do-people-think-darren-is-free-pavarotti). He isn't. Dominic Tracy (nee Barnes) stated the account was owned by a fan in Boston (www*masslive*com/television/2011/03/glee_exclusive_dominic_barnes*html) which was followed-up by an interview with with said Boston fan who owns it (www*masslive*com/television/2011/03/glee_exclusive_mr_boston_speak*html). As usual, tinhats bleat it was PR.

Ooohhh I love this....this is tooo delicious.

*****************************************************************

akf-ighting asked:Why do people think Darren is Free Pavarotti?

@mleight69:

There are quite a few reasons - some screen captured - others not

but all seem to lead to the same conclusion - despite PR attempts to “prove” it otherwise

the truth is hard to hide when it doesn’t want to be hidden

This was a fun exchange that pav jumped in on:

THIS ONE IS A PERSONAL FAVORITE:

if the above doesn’t scream Darren’s voice to you - nothing will.

And there was a third tweet from a female friend (can’t recall who) who told him to watch which account he was tweeting from and called him “birdbrain”

This was an interesting post:

on December 10th, there were three consecutive tweets. I have all three in my phone saved. 11:10: @DarrenCriss I was gonna hop in the shower but then I decided to do jumping jacks in there instead. and then at 11:15: @DarrenCriss I was gonna hop in a cab but I realized there was no room in there for it. Plus I had nowhere to go. Sorry cab driver please let me out. and THEN, at 11:21: @FreePavarotti I was gonna hop to it but decided to walk instead. 3 MPH. So, basically, Darren mixed up accounts. (Tweets from FreePavarotti generally have #FreePav at the end.) The tweet was promptly deleted, so very few people have proof that it happened, but I do. it proved that Darren runs @FreePavarotti. LINK

I have seen screencaps of the tweet that Pav sent out the night of Chris’ 21st bad when they were on tour

Pav was drunk - or acting drunk - both are possible - the tweet was deleted

like the others that pointed too specifically to who was in charge of the account

I believe it is both Chris and Darren - but mostly Darren

The timing of events and information known - a lot not possible without some inside info

Many are in Darren’s playful and mischievous voice (with a possible assist from Chris at many)

And honestly - WHY would anyone work so hard to cover up something that was just a random fan having fun?! LINK

Another incidence of PR overkill - that only proves the opposite to be true -they seem to have mastered this maneuver - don’t you think?!

Free pav continues to favorite things time and again

and frequently they are INTERESTING choices for sure!

Choose for yourself - but coincidences are only coincidences SO MANY TIMES

time will tell

************************************************************************

(X)

********************************************************************************

'Glee' exclusive: Mr. Boston speaks about FreePavarotti Twitter

Updated Mar 25, 2019; Posted Mar 31, 2011 Comment0sharesBy

Samantha Stephens, The Republican

Who would have thought that a bird could cause such a commotion?Pavarotti might have only appeared on a couple episodes of Glee but Kurt Hummel's (Chris Colfer) pet warbler stole the attention and devotion of thousands of Glee fans.

With a popular Twitter account, which currently has 9,483 followers, Pavarotti kept fans entertained with witty status updates about his caretaker, the Warblers, Kurt's budding relationship with Blaine (Darren Criss), and his own budding romance with Warbler Luke Edgemon.

As the account became popular, speculation over who ran the account swept the internet. Most fans agreed that it had to be a member of the Glee cast. But disparities on whether the account was operated by a Warbler, Darren Criss, or a joint-effort was a topic of debate for many.

When I started what I referred to as my “Wild Warbler Week”, in which I had the pleasure of chatting with three of the Warbler boys, I decided to try to get to the bottom of this mystery.

I was prepared to listen to the standard "he's a bird!" reply that had always been given when anyone attempted to solve this conundrum. But, lo and behold, I received the information on the first attempt thanks to Dominic Barnes.

We may never know the mysterious Mr. Boston’s true identity, he refused to answer any personal questions, but he offered an exclusive interview in which he revealed some of the magic (or should I say glitter?) behind the famous Twitter account.

When did you start the account? Where did the idea come from? The account began on December 1, 2010. It was the day after Pavarotti appeared on the show, I think. I started watching Glee when the Warblers first appeared, which was a couple weeks prior. I've done joke Twitters before in a different context, and it was a lot of fun. The initial idea was to start a campaign to "free Pavarotti", hence the username, while retweeting information about the Beelzebubs and bullying, to keep it in context. When I started tweeting, though, doing the character seemed like a more fun, accessible way to put that stuff out there.

Where did you get the ideas for the status updates? Do you have a favorite status or one that is particularly memorable? I had two different characters in mind for Pavarotti; one was the actor, an actual bird on set, totally infatuated with his own success and enamored with his fellow Warblers. He's the one who actually acts like a bird. The other was the bird in the show. That Pavarotti was meant to be a little more like a miniature Kurt; he overplays the "gay", gets excited about hanging out with Blaine, loves to sing to himself, and pretends to be well-educated about things like fashion, history, and music, while in reality he's just tossing his sassy feathers around, saying please, look at me, don't let me get lost, I'm bright yellow, I want to be important! Ha ha.

The other factor in updating the Twitter was relevancy; What's a hot topic in the world (Libya; Japan)?, Is there something I can do to stick with the gay/bullying theme (Trevor Project; transgender boy actor bird; It Gets Better)?, and What's up with my caretakers and how can I redirect some followers to them (Warblers; Bubs; Glee)?

I don't think I have a favorite. There are over 800 tweets on the account, you know! Every time I got to say "I'm not Someone Famous, because I'm a bird," that was awesome. Bird puns, too. Bird titles. Bird anything, really.

Did you ever expect it to become such a phenomenon within the Glee fandom? Not in a million years! I didn't even expect it to catch the eye of people in the show - and while I made some fun tweets, Pavarotti's popularity is due entirely to the Warblers & co. If it weren't for some of the guys being great sports, playing along, and pretending that Pavarotti was the real bird they worked with, this conversation we're having would be even more absurd. The Darren Criss conspiracy theory is also to blame.

Could you elaborate on the Darren Criss conspiracy for people who might not be familiar with it? I once dueled a tiger upon the harsh wastelands of Kentucky, but as soon as I managed to subdue this creature, it tweeted that I was actually Darren Criss to the World Wide Web. Its approximately three and a half million followers were fooled instantly and a thousand of them became personally invested. In order to preserve my secret identity and continue to oppose Professor Zoom and Magneto in their dastardly schemes, I played along until the time was rife to take revenge.

You said you had two ideas for how to maintain the Pavarotti Twitter, how did you decide between the two ideas? I used both Pavarotti - the bird and the actor. Some people picked up on this right away. It's not necessary in order to read it, though. The plan to use it as a "freedom campaign" was nixed almost immediately, because doing the character tweets was too much fun. And also because I couldn't come up with a neat little logo to save my life.

A huge part of the Twitter account was dedicated to the relationship between Luke Edgemon and Pavarotti. How did that get started and will you and Luke remain in touch? Luke was the first Warbler to tweet at FreePavarotti as though he were the real deal - he said "Pleasure working with you today!" and that was the beginning of my credibility. The romantic tweets just happened. Truly the age-old story of a canary and a boy falling in love. We will! At least, I hope so. We still text through private messages.

Pav had a lot of status updates about "Klaine" - do you think he's smiling from Bird Heaven now that they're finally (unofficially) together? What are your personal opinions on that storyline? I think Pavarotti loved both of the boys, as well as the rest of the Warblers. He did his best to chirp it up with Kurt, and Blaine was a real pal. I don't think he would have much of an opinion on the relationship itself, aside from what it does to Blaine and the Pips' set-list. Personally, it's important to have a gay relationship on primetime T.V., even if it's as silly as any other hookup on Glee. The "Brittana" excites me more, to be honest! People need to see that - LGBT intolerance is heading the way of dodo birds, shell suits, and separate drinking fountains, so we better darn well get a more and more positive presence in the media with each passing day.

Who has a stronger love: Pav and Luke or Kurt and Blaine? Love is the most powerful force in the universe; it's not a spectator sport. Be careful with that!

You mentioned one of the themes you wanted to touch upon with the Pav account was the bullying issue. What are your thoughts about the Kurt/Karofsky storyline and the possibility for Karosky's redemption? I'm not really qualified to talk about this! But here goes: I do like to think that anyone can find redemption, especially somebody who's lost and lashing out like Karofsky. The locker room kiss scene turns my stomach, and getting Kurt out of that entire environment was definitely the right thing to do. I'm sure Karofsky will "see the light", for lack of a better term. It's been set since that Superbowl number. I just don't know how much divine vengeance is too much - his remorse alone isn't really enough to make up for what he's done, but taking a crowbar to the guy's head would be overkill! Glee will, with any luck, find a happy medium and a happy ending for him. He and guys like him could use a little hope.

How difficult has it been to keep the secret, especially when so many people assumed the account was run by a Warbler or member of the cast? A fair number of folks on the human plane have known about the account from the start. I'm grateful that none of them have spoiled the fun. I experience a mixture of guilt and glee when accused of being a member of the cast; I figured if anybody in the inner sanctum of Glee minded, I'd get in trouble, or someone would clear the air, so I'm guessing anybody on Glee who's heard of me gets just as much satisfaction out of toying with the emotions of Twitter as I do. Splendid. I don't need these five minutes of fame attached to my face; having this game on the internet was fun enough.

What did you think the reaction would be when it was revealed that you weren't a member of the Glee cast? I was surprised that the Warblers were surprised - I thought they were all just playing along! I figured Darren Criss would laugh to himself. You know, everybody's different - I knew some people would be disappointed, some people would be really amused, and some would still insist I'm a member of the cast.

Do you keep in touch with anyone from the cast of Glee? I could just tell you "no," but that's not very mysterious. I have a feeling folks would be skeptical, too. How about...my buddies are my secret, and the poor cast of Glee and I can continue to try to live our lives as ordinary people, connection or no connection.

Were you a fan of the show before you started the Twitter? If so, what was your favorite episode or cover? Nope! I'd never seen it before the Warblers appeared. But since then I've ended up with the box set of the first season, and I've seen some of it. I loved the episode with the mattress commercial. I like Teenage Dream a lot. I also liked Forget You and Vogue.

Who is your favorite Glee character? Puck. He appeals to my sensibilities. He's a cool dude with a lot to prove. He gets some great lines. He's just great. He can be both a bully and a kicked puppy.

When and how did you find out that Pav was going to die in "Original Songs"? I found out when people started tweeting me asking if it was true. That's how I learned a lot of things; I don't read the news blogs, and I don't really talk to people on the inside - well, I wouldn't be so rude as to ask for deets on spoilers all the time if I did, although I shot off a couple of excited messages to Warblers when I discovered "my" days were numbered. I toyed with the hearts of my followers, and as soon as I was informed that the death was actually going to happen, I began to plot my own demise.

On Glee, Kurt assumes Pavarotti dies from a stroke. Is that what really happened? How did you decide what the final tweet would be? Pavarotti either died of a stroke or of a glitter overdose. There was no time for an autopsy, in between singing and making out, so the world may never know. I had the final few days' worth of tweets saved on my phone weeks in advance. Pavarotti died while chirping out a tune; that's the way he wanted to live, so that's the way he had to go. The song seemed relevant.

Do you approve of the bedazzled coffin Pav was laid to rest in? It's beautiful. A glittery little box for his glittery little spirit.

There was about a week between Pav's death and the funeral. Where was he hanging out in the meantime? Kurt probably kept him in a well-decorated mini-fridge. Or maybe they used a slingshot to send him out into space at relativistic speed, so that he'd land back on Earth without decaying too much.Assuming that's where Pav is, what's Bird Heaven like?I'm not dead or a bird, so I couldn't tell you!

Are you or will you troll again? I'm glad that someone detailed for me exactly what the parameters of trolling are last night.I have had other Twitter accounts in the past; none taken as seriously as this one, and nowhere near the follower account this one generated. I have a new joke character Twitter account going, with a smaller following and a more casually fun tweeting schedule. It has been mistaken as an official Twitter in its franchise once or twice, too, but that impression was almost immediately dispelled by the followers and context. I don't plan on ever publicly linking them to each other, or my future endeavors.

Is the new Twitter account Glee, Darren Criss, or Starkid related? How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop? (X)

*******************************************************************

So there you go...another cc trope, forever stricken from the masterpost!

#cc #ccer #cc fandom #crisscolfer #darren criss #free Pavarotti #Debunking cc lies

10 notes · View notes

innuendostudios · 6 years

Video

youtube

The next video in my series on Alt-Right rhetorical strategies. You can help this series come out regularly, as well as support my other work, by backing me on Patreon.

Transcript below the cut.

Say, for the sake of argument, there's this feminist media critic whose work you respect. Being an internet-savvy human in the information age, you sometimes share your opinions of her work on your various social media platforms. And you've noticed, whenever you speak positively of her, many different people come out to yell the same handful of things at you.

It usually starts with, "How can you support that conwoman after she stole thousands of dollars from people?"

And you say, "No, she didn't steal anything, she ran a crowdfunding campaign that people contributed willingly to, and overwhelmingly those people seem satisfied with their donations."

And they say, "Yeah, she asked for a hundred thousand dollars for a shitty little project."

And you say, "No, she got a hundred thousand, because people got excited about her work and gave her more than she asked for, but the original pitch was only 10k. Also, how many times have you given that number to people without looking it up?"

And they say, "Yeah, she asked for 10k and then never finished anything."

And you say, "No, she finished the project earlier this year. Of course it took longer than it was originally pitched, you get ten times what you ask for you’re kind of obligated to make a bigger project, because, if you didn't, that would be running away with ninety grand..."

Now, by this time you’ve noticed your interlocutor's position has changed from "she stole from people" to "she asked too much to begin with" to "she took too long to deliver" as though these are all the same argument. You also notice the pattern of the conversation: he says something short, quippy, and wrong, you give a detailed correction, he says something else short, quippy, wrong, and only tangentially related to his last point, and the cycle repeats itself. This goes on and on.

And it's not, you've noticed, just this discussion; you find this manner of argument often whenever you express left-of-center beliefs. You talk about the election, someone says you vote Democrat because you must have a conservative father you hate; you talk about polyamory, someone says if you have more than one female partner you must be a sexist; or they just say you're faking a non-regional accent. (I don’t understand that one, either.)

The running theme here is all these people who ostensibly want a frank exchange of ideas spend a lot more time making accusations than asking questions. Because, why ask what you believe when they can tell you what you believe and make you correct them? And if you ever don’t correct them, must be because they’re right.

And you're not naive; you see what's going on here. This isn't about conversation, it's about boxes. When you say something cogent that they don't agree with, and they get the sinking feeling that you might start making sense, they need a reason not to listen to you. So they reach for a box to stick you in: dishonest feminism, fake progressivism, daddy-issue liberalism. No one in those boxes is worth listening to, which means, as long as they've got you in one, they're not at risk of having their minds changed. This isn’t even an argument with you, not really; their presenting themselves with arguments for why they don't have to listen to you.

So your first reflex is to defy their expectations. "Actually, my dad was a draft-dodging hippie who told me he loved me every day." "And I never said what genders my partners are but I promise they're all feminists." "As for my accent- actually, I don't know what to do with the accent thing." But the point is, “I refuse to fit in your box.” And if they can't put you in one, if they can't dismiss you outright, they'll have to engage with your argument.

But if you've spent any time arguing with angry dudes online you know what I'm about to say: They don’t. This accusatory, condescending attitude never falters. Because a technique that has permeated anti-progressivism is to Never Play Defense.

Now don't get me wrong, what I said about the Right fitting the Left into simplified boxes as a way of preserving their own egos, I do think that's a thing, at least for many people much of the time. And I think the reassurance it brings is why the technique stays so popular. But that framing is about how individual people are feeling in isolated moments, and leaves out the larger game that's being played. Because there is a long-term strategic value to never playing defense, and it's less to do with arguments than with attitude.

From your perspective, this debate about the feminist is a joke. This guy doesn't know what he's talking about, he comes in hot without confirming any of his assumptions, the whole conversation is you repeatedly schooling an ignorant dipshit. But that's only if you’re the fool who listens to what’s actually being said. Never Play Defense is a strategy that looks past language to posture; the tone, word choice, even the expressions on your faces. If you half-focus your eyes and look not at the words but the flow of the conversation, you can see the dynamic at play:

He says his short, quippy statement, and you give your detailed rebuttal. He then picks a single point from your response and attacks that as the new subject. Now, to an onlooker, the logical brain would register that he's leaving 90% of your argument on the table, and that, by changing positions, he's conceding he lost the first round. But the lizard brain notices that he's always making the accusations, always in the dominant position, that he's always acting and you're always reacting. Regardless of what is said, he displays all the outward signs of winning. So, on a purely emotional level, he leaves the impression of being right.

I have never had an argument look like this that wasn’t in public. This is a technique that means speaking not so much to the other person as to the people watching. Liberals tend to operate as though voters are beings of pure reason, and neglect that rational people still have emotions, and those emotions factor into what they believe. And that long after this argument is over, when people only half-remember what was said, what lingers on is what impressions the speakers made.

Ronald Reagan coined the phrase, "If you're explaining, you're losing." The trick is, if he's always accusing, then you're always explaining.

This technique of winning by looking like you’re winning is not new, and, historically, it's been used by both parties. But modern liberals seem especially susceptible to it because it plays on one of their big weaknesses, which is - and I say this with love - the liberal fantasy of putting someone in their place.

Any time a free speech warrior gets the Bill of Rights quoted to them, when a racist gets "historical accuracy" explained by an actual historian, liberals take screencaps. We put it on Storify. We pass that shit around like theater popcorn. We live for the day an ignorant prick gets dunked on.

I remind you: this was the central conceit of an entire TV show. [West Wing clip.]

But let me ask you: in all these scenarios, who's doing all the explaining?

The reason scenes like this are so satisfying is precisely because they activate the emotions. Everyone wants to be Joseph Welch telling off McCarthy, where an appeal to reason looks like winning. But the Right has learned that, if you never look like you’re losing, you can convince a lot of people that you’re not. And, if you keep your statements short and punchy, people will remember what you said better than they remember the long explanation of why it’s untrue. If done correctly, you might even convince yourself you know what you’re talking about.

Now, again, this is not exclusive to the Right - this is how most teenagers argue regardless of their politics, where it’s less important to be right than it is to be better than someone. But mixed with Control the Conversation - see previous video - the Right has a full-bodied cocktail for manipulating how the Left argues.

But where it gets dangerous is in how the Alt-Right has capitalized on this.

This argument isn’t just about sticking a woman in the Lying Feminism box so she doesn’t have to be listened to, it’s also signaling to anyone watching what box they should stick her in. Even if an onlooker recognizes that she literally did not con anyone out of their money, the idea that how much she asked for and how long she took to deliver are relevant to her credibility is still planted in their heads. It subtly suggests that, the next time they feel threatened by a female media critic, maybe they should look at how much money she makes, how long her work takes to produce; maybe they don’t have to listen to her, because they’ve got this handy box.

So what’s most valuable to the Alt-Right is not who wins or loses any individual argument, it’s the mechanics of the argument itself; it’s the boxes. Over the last several years the far Right has pushed hard on a number of reductive categories: the Cultural Marxism box, the Reverse Racism box, even terms like “beta” and “mangina” are just shorthands for the Failed Masculinity box. The Alt-Right is a box factory, putting huge swaths of Leftist rhetoric, most especially that that would rebut their core positions, into categories where they can be summarily ignored.

These myths have power if and only if they are immediately recognizable to a lot of people. One function of this aggressive posturing is that they want to provoke an argument, to be so pompous that you’re itching to publicly take this asshole down, which gives that asshole access to your followers. It’s about them introducing a myth to your audience and reinforcing that myth for theirs. And that myth gets spread even when you feel like you’re winning.

I can’t tell you the best way to deal with this, but I do know one way, which is to keep control of your own story. When someone comes out the gate with accusations, it’s a big red flag that they are not arguing in good faith. You are not required to argue with them. When someone says something untrue, you can just tell your audience what the truth is without acknowledging the lie or the one repeating it. A detailed explanation lands a lot better when it’s not being contrasted with a sound bite. Decide for yourself how your audience gets acquainted with a popular fiction, and never be too proud to delete a comment.

In this political climate, these debates have real impact on real people’s lives. They’re not, in fact, a game of football. So if someone tries to force you to play defense, you don’t have to play.

#video essay #the alt-right playbook #alt-right

259 notes · View notes