not 2 sound whiny but i wish more attention was given to the importance of art and literature and philosophy and other humanities again so they’ll return to being a really great part of what shapes a decade or an era instead of being seen as useless because they don’t fit into the capitalist ideal of a productive society
The world: spends a year consuming art to stave off crippling depression about the state of everything
Also the world: excellent, let’s reduce funding so we can kickstart the real economy. Coal.
i saw some comments on tiktok where people were talking bout how they found tumblr too hard to use and part of it being that there was no lack of dates so “what if you reblog or like something from five years ago?!”
buddy… we have posts circulating still from 2011, its literally just how it is
Honestly the biggest disappointment I had researching ABC was that medieval authors did not, in fact, see the creatures they were describing and were trying their best to describe them with their limited knowledge while going “what the fuck… what the fuck…”
Instead all those creatures you know came about from transcription and translation errors from copying Greco-Roman sources (who themselves got them from travelers’ tales from Persia and India - rhino -> unicorn, tiger -> manticore, python -> dragon, and so on).
So unicorns are real
behold… a unicorn
I always thought animals in medieval manuscripts looked like the result of having to draw say. A Tree Kangaroo, but your only source for what it looked like was your friend who heard it from a fellow who knows a man who swears he saw one once, whilst very drunk and lost, and I am SO PLEASED to find out this is, in fact, the case.
- Neck of a snake
- body of a leopard
- haunches of a lion
- feet off a hart (deer)
So is it
don’t forget that some of the legendary creatures they were describing were from other people’s mythos which were passed down in the oral tradition for gods know how long. You know what existed in Eurasia right around the time we were domesticating wolves into dogs?
these beasties. For a long time, science had them down as going extinct 200 thousand years ago, but then we found some bones from 36 thousand years ago. Which, y’know, is quite a difference. Since you can bet that any skeleton we find is not literally the last one of its kind to live, many creatures have date ranges unknowably far outside the evidence.
In South Asia there were cultures that described a man-beast/troll forrest giant who’s knuckles dragged the ground, and everybody from the west was sure it was superstitious mumbo jumbo, but you know what used to live there?
And did you know that some of the earliest white colonizers of the Americas heard accounts that there were natives still alive who had seen and hunted and eaten a great hairy beast, shaggy like the buffalo but much bigger, with a long thin nose like a snake and two giant fangs… so, like, mammoths, you know? but they were totally discounted because europeans of the time were like, elephants live in Africa and aren’t hairy, you can’t fool us, pranksters!
Anyway, the point is between the early writing game of telephone description thing talked about by OP, and the discounting of native cultural accuracy, I’m pretty sure most legendary creatures are in fact real animals one way or another
It can’t explain every single legendary creature, but yes, this is super important. Because History relies on written sources, it tends to sweep oral tradition under the rug, even if there’s a lot of interesting informations in it.
And it’s not just living animals that were badly described, or which descriptions got exaggerated over the course of centuries or through translation errors. Sometimes, people finding fossil bones of extinct animals might have also influenced some myths!
By now this is pretty well-known but it has been theorised that the Greek myth of the cyclops was started when people found Deinotherium skulls. Now you might say, uh, how is it possible to think a cousin of the elephant is a huge human dude with one eye?
Here’s a less well-known one; the griffin is a mythological hybrid with the body of a lion and the head and wings of an eagle. The earliest traces of this myth come from ancient Iranian and ancient Egyptian art, from more than 3000 BC. In Iranian mythology, it’s called
شیردال (shirdal, “lion eagle”). Now, it’s been the subject of some debate and it’s not confirmed, but there’s a theory that people might have seen some Protoceratops and Psittacosaurus fossils in Asia and might have interpreted it as “a lion with an eagle’s head”:
This is a pretty well accepted theory for why dragons (or animals we group as like dragons, eg wyverns and drakes) are seen in mythos almost worldwide - because people found dinosaur bones, looked at them, and went “oh fuck what’s that? some big…. lizardy thing?” and then created dragons.
Also many deagon legends are simply exaggerations of well-known living reptiles like snakes and crocodilians.a
It also explains why dragons can look so different in the myths of the various regions.
In asia, Dragons tend to look very long and snake like:
One of the most common dinosaurs that used to like in the asia region, so would have been the most common fossils found by people:
The Mamenchisaurus, this thing is just all neck and tail! You find just half a fossilised skeleton of this monster, you can easily end up thinking of a long snake-like beast.
South America also has legends snake-like dragons among some of its peoples:
What fossils from pre-historic south America could be found?
The Titanoboa, which can easily grow to be 40 feet long.
What fossils could have been found in that region:
Pterosaur, and Triceratops. Features of both sets of skeletons could have been merged into one legendary creature.
Then we get our European style dragon:
One of the most common fossils that could have been found was a
which, despite being a herbivore, looked to have a mouth of sharp looking teeth, consistant with a dragons.
Dragons amongst the peoples of Africa are even more varied, but most revolve around some kind of giant snake-like creature. As a quick example, we’ll take Dan Ayido Hwedo commonly found in West African mythology.
Fossils in that area could have been included the Aegyptosaurus:
A quick google search tells me that most Sauropods: well known for being long necked and long tailed, are found in Africa.
If you found only a half complete skeleton of this thing; which is likely, because it’s rare to find a complete dinosaur skeleton, you could easily think of a giant snake monster.
This has a similar energy to looking at the myth of the changelings, as in “the fey have stolen my baby child and replaced them with an imposter, i know that because now they act weird, they don’t mix with the other kids and make strange noises and movements”.
Because nowadays we can just say “yeah, that’s just autism actually”.
This post gets better every time it comes across my dash
Things with no gay/queer rep can be progressive and groundbreaking actually and need to be part of the discussion of representation in media
A show about an interracial disabled couple (that’s written well) is just as progressive as a show about two gay characters
A show with multiple well written POC characters, especially in leading roles, is progressive and should be part of the discussion
Representation has never onlymeantqueer rep.
And I hate that so many of POC and disabled people see that shows and books that represent them, not get included or acknowledge in the discussion about representation.
Just because something doesn’t represent you, doesn’t mean it’s not representing someone else.
Yes queer rep is good, of course it is (I’m neither cis nor het) but I can not begin to understand how so many of you will just,,,ignore shows that represent POC and/or disabled people in a well written and positive way because it’s not what you are. Or tell us that when we mention them as good examples of rep that it’s not really representation.
The world exist outside of you and your experience.
ethan winters as a protagonist is actually very funny because you’re surrounded by sexy vampire ladies and sick monsters and then it’s just some guy who looks like he would approach me on campus and try to debate me about healthcare for his youtube channel
this man is going to duel me in the marketplace of ideas
With respect to the whole sex-scenes-in-movies discourse, I think that nearly any comedy of the silent film era would in fact be greatly improved by the addition of a gratuitous sex scene, provided that it was shot and edited with the exact sensibilities of the era’s slapstick chase sequences, complete with flailing limbs, jangly piano score, frenetic undercranked film speed, and – this is key – that obligatory moment where the protagonist abruptly pauses to wipe their brow and give the camera a pointed Look before getting back to it.
Two houses both alike in dignity never establishes the level of dignity they both obtain. This is usually assumed to be high, but could in fact be extremely low. Thus an adaptation of Romeo and Juliet with both houses being rival clown troupes would not be in opposition to the text. In this essay I will
In case you’re wondering, yes, I gave Snape a mustache! 😁 I put it up to a vote over on Instagram, because he has a mustache in some of the chapter art in the books! I thought it could be a fun departure from his usual design from the movies, and it won the vote!
This scene was the one that made me hate Snape… Even after all the Lily backstory, I couldn’t like him. Maybe that’s why I felt the need to give him a nice villain mustache! 😂
i think that when god made stealing a mortal sin he didn’t know that walmart would ever exist
I’m absolutely not a rabbi, but I’ve been thinking a lot about this, actually, and what stealing might mean to gd. and I know this post is probably a joke but like I said. been thinking about it a lot.
So what a lot of people may not know is that the Torah is mostly like. a farming manual. A day-to-day life guide for 6,000 years ago. And so it has instructions for harvesting, of course. But it says specifically that you shouldn’t reap all the way to the edge of your field, and that you should leave that for the poor. It also says that you shouldn’t take the fallen grapes from your vineyard, and to leave that also for the poor. And a lot more little things like that.
So why is it encouraged? Why doesn’t it count as stealing for the poor to take the food you grew?
I think that gd’s definition of stealing would, in this case, punish you if you did take the fallen food from your fields, because you’d be taking it from the mouths and bellies of people who clearly desperately need it. It’s not the poor who are stealing, because they are simply trying to survive. I think gd wants us to remember, in our harvests, in our successes, that we have a duty to give what we can to those who need it, and if we don’t, that’s stealing from our fellow human.
In other words, pouring bleach on edible food thrown in dumpsters is stealing, and a mortal sin.
deleting my dating apps bc I wanna meet someone the old fashioned way (taking an Archivist position and hating my coworker for several years before eventually realizing I can’t live without him and saving him from the Lonely)
Possible versions of Martin K Blackwood’s full name that I’ve thought of, from most realistic to least
- Martin K Blackwood (it’s literally just a K)
- Martin Kay Blackwood (it’s a pun, he did actually say his full name)
- Martin Knife Blackwood (didn’t think of this one, but it would make sense if he changed his middle name. This one goes along with Martin being trans and I think changing your middle name to Knife without telling your parent as a form of rebellion is exactly the sort of thing he’d do)
- Martin Kartin Blackwood
- Martin Klackwood Blackwood
Damn why didn’t I think of cooler middle names! I just pickly slightly altered versions of my parents names… I could’ve had Knife as a middle name!
Just a reminder because apparently people don’t realize this, but the rainbow gay pride flag isn’t like…a gay male pride flag? it was literally meant as a pride flag for everyone in the community. not that there’s anything wrong with specific identities having their own flag, but i keep seeing ppl post flag sets as if the rainbow ride flag only represents gay men and saying that not including every single other flag known in existence means you’re excluding people when no it’s not the rainbow flag is for everyone
I think this is really important for people who are daunted by all the labels and still figuring themselves out. It’s okay. The rainbow flag is yours too
I still like the idea of Bruce Wayne making a point to take each of his kids individually out to movies, even though there’s a movie theater in his house, because he needs all of them to experience a joy that’s permanently beyond him which is “going to the movies with dad and having him still be alive when you get home” and it usually isn’t until they get home and talk to their other siblings that they realize why he was white-knuckling a blackjack for the whole 20-foot walk from the movie theater doors to the back of Alfred’s towncar
Bruce, taking a 13-year-old Dick Grayson to his first concert (Britney Spears, 2004 Onyx Hotel Tour at the Wachovia Center with backstage passes) and paying off the whole security staff to let his butler keep the car idling directly outside the stage door so they can leave quickly after the show. Alfred’s already bought one of everything in Dick’s size from the merch table because it’s very important that they all get in the armored Lincoln Continental with bulletproof windows as quickly as possible after the show, so this can stay a happy memory for Dick as an adult that doesn’t constantly compel him to do anything
Alfred letting Bruce think this is for the kids and not a way for him to unlearn trauma and re-associate the theatre with happier memories really makes this for me