i can use his classism against him
i can use his classism against him
there’s only so much you can write about a guy who really hates trains
then wrote a poem calling trains sublime
like he hated railways. a lot. this was the guy with the placard screaming at trains as they roll by for ruining nature for rich people.
‘POOR PEOPLE CAN’T COMPREHEND THE BEAUTY OF NATURE! KEEP THE PEASANTS OFF OF MY LAKE DISTRICT!’
he probably cried himself to sleep thinking of the increased accessibility to natural spaces for the great unwashed
‘i bet they won’t write poetry about it’, he whispers to himself, ‘i bet they won’t even be able toreadpoetry about it’
and then he writes a poem about railways
the sarciest poem ever
“IN SPITE OF ALL THAT BEAUTY MAY DISOWN IN YOUR HARSH FEATURES NATURE DOTH EMBRACE HER LAWFUL OFFSPRING IN MAN’S ART! WANKERS!”
i despise you, wordsworth
This is an open call to arms to anyone and everyone in the Hannibal fandom (that’s you!), whether you consider yourself an active part of the community or an attentive bystander!
Tumblr user liberace-egalite-fraternite and I are piecing together a collection of essays (including academic articles and reflection pieces), illustrations, graphics (incl. collages) and other creative works (short fiction, poetry, fanmixes, …recipes) inspired by the NBC television series (plots, characters, etc.). While you may refer to other installments of the Hannibal canon, the primary focus is on the NBC series. We are creating a compendium .pdf ‘zine to represent a fandom populace as multi-faceted, aesthetically brilliant and emotionally arresting as the series proper. (Note, the ‘zine is as of yet untitled, but as a work in progress we are unofficially calling it ‘operation hanniballin’)
If you are interested in submitting, keep in mind:
- All submitted content should be original, and any referenced or utilized resources (incl. anything from the public domain) should be visibly credited in or on the work itself or accompanied by a list of cited works (incl. episode titles, if you are using stills from the show)
- Written pieces should be no more than 1000 words and submitted as .pdf, .doc or similar plain text file with a word count
- Artwork should be hq .png or .jpg
- Fanmixes should be uploaded to a streaming website such as 8tracks and submitted with cover art (subject to the same conditions as above) and a track listing
- There is no limit to how many submissions you can send in!
Please send all submissions to email@example.com before June 6th. If you have any questions whatsoever, please don’t hesitate to contact us via email or by coming to our ask boxes directly!
David Bowie, Marion Cotillard, and Gary Oldman in David Bowie’s new music video for The Next Day (x)
I feel inspired and refreshed by this video. If David Bowie can make a career being this bloody batshit then I can pass an exam by pretending I’m David Bowie.
jesus was a tree
a tree was jesus
aemilia lanyer knew
i am going to spend all of my money on sushi
all of it
Sidenote—out of curiosity, if tumblr user liberace-egalite-fraternite and I were to put together a ‘zine on NBC’s Hannibal, would anyone be interested in reading it/contributing to it?
I replied with a yes but I need to reblog with a yes as well so that my response is DOUBLE YES.
Wanna read an essay on the construction of male virginity in the early modern period that insinuates Neptune and Leander totally did it midway through Hero & Leander?
Hymeneutics: “for it is better to marry than to burn” - The Depiction of Virginity in Marlowe’s ‘Hero and Leander’
Marlowe’s depiction of virginity in Hero and Leander serves to critique the hypocrisy in sixteenth-century culture of a significant conception of female virginity and the absence of a male counterpart. By employing and inverting tropes of female virginity – for instance, a convent for Venus – Marlowe is challenging the cultural importance of the maidenhead. Furthermore, through feminising Leander and providing the penetrative threat of Neptune, Marlowe seeks to create a form of subversive male virginity. In remodelling notions of virginity, entrenched as they are in religious culture, Marlowe is destabilising gender binaries in order to critique religion’s role in perpetuating sex and gender differences in society.
""Let's call a truce."
gwendoline christie has the most beautiful broad shoulders omfg. goddess.
There were, Laqueur suggests, three reasons why the Enlightenment concluded that masturbation was perverse and unnatural. First, while all other forms of sexuality were reassuringly social, masturbation—even when it was done in a group or taught by wicked servants to children—seemed in its climactic moments deeply, irremediably private. Second, the masturbatory sexual encounter was not with a real, flesh-and-blood person but with a phantasm. And third, unlike other appetites, the addictive urge to masturbate could not be sated or moderated. “Every man, woman, and child suddenly seemed to have access to the boundless excesses of gratification that had once been the privilege of Roman emperors.”
Privacy, fantasy, insatiability: each of these constitutive features of the act that the Enlightenment taught itself to fear and loathe is, Laqueur argues, a constitutive feature of the Enlightenment itself. Tissot and his colleagues had identified the shadow side of their own world: its interest in the private life of the individual, its cherishing of the imagination, its embrace of a seemingly limitless economy of production and consumption. Hammering away at the social, political, and religious structures that had traditionally defined human existence, the eighteenth century proudly brought forth a shining model of moral autonomy and market economy—only to discover that this model was subject to a destructive aberration. The aberration—the physical act of masturbating—was not in itself so obviously dreadful. When Diderot and his circle of sophisticated encyclopédistes offered their considered view of the subject, they acknowledged that moderate masturbation as a relief for urgent sexual desires that lacked a more satisfying outlet seemed natural enough. But the problem was that “moderate masturbation” was a contradiction in terms: the voluptuous, fiery imagination could never be so easily restrained.
Masturbation then became a sexual bugbear, Laqueur argues, because it epitomized all of the fears that lay just on the other side of the new sense of social, psychological, and moral independence. A dramatic increase in individual autonomy was bound up, as he convincingly documents, with an intensified anxiety about unsocialized, unreproductive pleasure, pleasure fueled by seductive chimeras ceaselessly generated by the vagrant mind:
“The Enlightenment project of liberation—the coming into adulthood of humanity—made the most secret, private, seemingly harmless, and most difficult to detect of sexual acts the centerpiece of a program for policing the imagination, desire, and the self that modernity itself had unleashed.”
when a 35-year-old man interrupts a teenage girl in a room filled with hundreds of people and accuses her of “ruining it for everyone,” that is called bullying.
I think repetitive questions shouldn’t be asked, but I don’t think the question at hand - ie, over queer subtext - is ‘stupid’. There’s a long and noble history of queer readings dedicated to finding the concealed and insinuated sexuality in texts - why can’t that be extended to other forms of media? It’s not necessarily a ‘fanficesque’ question, but then again, it’s not a question that should be geared so much towards the actors, but the writers. Alas, we live in a culture obsessed with actors portraying characters rather than the writers constructing them. But that’s deviating from the point. The point being that queering a text, whether that be the work of Marlowe or a TV show about killing monsters, is relevant, and must continue to be relevant, as it’s an important exercise in increased queer visibility and representation.
watchthelightfade said: he’s allowed to be uncomfortable???
WHY does that make him uncomfortable? How is it different from all the ‘YOU AND YOUR COSTAR WOULD BE HOT TOGETHER’ narratives? What does this say about the heteronormative state of media and how we’re meant to regard that as acceptable when a leading man says ‘the gay makes me uncomfortable’ and we all go ‘bravo, dude, that’s your place as a heterosexual male, to say the notion of queer makes you uncomfortable’. Yeah, feel uncomfortable. It’s different to what he’s used to. But banning questions from the fans who support his show? That’s a fucking leap.
If any other bro said ‘YOU ARE NOT TO ASK ME ABOUT THE QUEER SUBTEXT OF MY WORK FOR IT ICKS ME’ they’d be leapt upon. But because he’s model pretty we’re all up his ass? It just doesn’t wash. This is some rose-tinted shit going on and it’s skeezy as hell.