By the Quality of his Enemies

RSS
zennhearts:

sammydma:

grellholmes:

elsajeni:

gunslingerannie:

justtkeepcalmm:

dean-and-his-pie:

fororchestra:

musicalmelody:

Fun Story: My director kept telling me and my tenor sax buddy to play softer. No matter what we did, it wasn’t soft enough for him. So getting frustrated, I told my buddy “Dont play this time. Just fake it” 
Our Band Director then informed us we sounded perfect. 

To my readers: “p” means quiet, “pp” means really quiet. I’ve never seen “pppp” before haha.
On the contrast, “f” means loud, and “ffff” probably means so loud you go unconscious.

I had ffff in a piece once and my conductor told me to play as loudly as physically possible without falling off my chair…

Me and my trombone buddies had “ffff” and he sat next to me and played so hard that he fell out of his chair.
The lengths we go for music.

Okay yeah so I play the bass clarinet and the amount of air you have to move and the stiffness of the reed means it only has two settings and that is loud and louder, with an optional LOUDEST that includes a 50% probability of HORRIBLE CROAKING NOISE which is the bass equivalent of the ubiquitous clarinet shriek.

One day, when I was in concert band in high school, we got a new piece handed out for the first time, and there was a strange little commotion back in the tuba section — whispering, and pointing at something in the music, and swatting at each other’s hands all shhh don’t call attention to it. And although they did attract the attention of basically everyone else in the band, they managed to avoid being noticed by the band director, who gave us a few minutes to look over our parts and then said, “All right, let’s run through it up to section A.”
And here we are, cheerfully playing along, sounding reasonably competent — but everyone, when they have the attention to spare, is keeping an eye on the tuba players. They don’t come in for the first eight measures or so, and then when they do come in, what we see is:
[stifled giggling]
[reeeeeeally deep breath]
[COLOSSAL FOGHORN NOISE]
The entire band stops dead, in the cacophonous kind of way that a band stops when it hasn’t actually been cued to stop. The band director doesn’t even say anything, just looks straight back at the tubas and makes a helpless sort of why gesture.
In unison, the tuba players defend themselves: “THERE WERE FOUR F’S.”
FFFF is not really a rational dynamic marking for any instrument, but for the love of all that is holy why would you put it in a tuba part.

This is the best band post 
Everyone else go home

I’m not even in band and I found this to be hysterical

Omg yay band things!!!

zennhearts:

sammydma:

grellholmes:

elsajeni:

gunslingerannie:

justtkeepcalmm:

dean-and-his-pie:

fororchestra:

musicalmelody:

Fun Story: My director kept telling me and my tenor sax buddy to play softer. No matter what we did, it wasn’t soft enough for him. So getting frustrated, I told my buddy “Dont play this time. Just fake it” 

Our Band Director then informed us we sounded perfect. 

To my readers: “p” means quiet, “pp” means really quiet. I’ve never seen “pppp” before haha.

On the contrast, “f” means loud, and “ffff” probably means so loud you go unconscious.

I had ffff in a piece once and my conductor told me to play as loudly as physically possible without falling off my chair…

Me and my trombone buddies had “ffff” and he sat next to me and played so hard that he fell out of his chair.

The lengths we go for music.

Okay yeah so I play the bass clarinet and the amount of air you have to move and the stiffness of the reed means it only has two settings and that is loud and louder, with an optional LOUDEST that includes a 50% probability of HORRIBLE CROAKING NOISE which is the bass equivalent of the ubiquitous clarinet shriek.

One day, when I was in concert band in high school, we got a new piece handed out for the first time, and there was a strange little commotion back in the tuba section — whispering, and pointing at something in the music, and swatting at each other’s hands all shhh don’t call attention to it. And although they did attract the attention of basically everyone else in the band, they managed to avoid being noticed by the band director, who gave us a few minutes to look over our parts and then said, “All right, let’s run through it up to section A.”

And here we are, cheerfully playing along, sounding reasonably competent — but everyone, when they have the attention to spare, is keeping an eye on the tuba players. They don’t come in for the first eight measures or so, and then when they do come in, what we see is:

[stifled giggling]

[reeeeeeally deep breath]

[COLOSSAL FOGHORN NOISE]

The entire band stops dead, in the cacophonous kind of way that a band stops when it hasn’t actually been cued to stop. The band director doesn’t even say anything, just looks straight back at the tubas and makes a helpless sort of why gesture.

In unison, the tuba players defend themselves: “THERE WERE FOUR F’S.”

FFFF is not really a rational dynamic marking for any instrument, but for the love of all that is holy why would you put it in a tuba part.

This is the best band post 

Everyone else go home

I’m not even in band and I found this to be hysterical

Omg yay band things!!!

(Source: housecatincarnate)

drarryjohnlockdestinyaremyships:

thetardisisatprivetdrive:

Mark Sheppard on fans at Comic Con [x]

one of the many reasons I love him

(Source: edstarksbastard)

Nov 3

shinyopals:

omfg supernatural 6x01 what the actual hell why is everything terrible???

Season 6 is a great big ball of WTF. Not so much the arc—there are issues with the arc, but the idea is not that bad. But the execution is abysmal. A friend and I agreed that season 6 is like watching the producers-and-writers-meeting where they decide what they’re going to do in the season. It’s a bunch of ideas haphazardly thrown at the wall, and very little actually manages to stick, but they still shot it like that.

Season 7 is better. It’s still messy, but the emotional arcs make more sense. It does end up being a little boring, though, since if they had too many ideas in season 6, they had too few in season 7. Stick it out, though, since season 8 and 9 (at least so far) are pretty much the best seasons the show’s ever produced. :D

Nov 1

lookatthesefreakinghipsters:

I think of all the moments between Dorothy and Charlie, this was my favourite.  Because it gives a different frame for the final scene than if Charlie had flirted with Dorothy.  

I wondered why they didn’t have Dorothy come out in the episode as gay or bi or queer, after all, there was certainly enough subtextual evidence to support such a reading of the character as such (she looks like such a beautiful, smitten kitten here).  But it occurred to me that doing so would make the final scene a very different thing indeed.  We’re so programmed to see any woman’s story as a potential romance first, as though the only thing a woman ever wants in life is a romantic partner.  Within the context of that societal programming, revealing Dorothy to be queer would make her a likely or potential romantic partner for Charlie.  But then Charlie’s departure would be read as her throwing aside her life to pursue a romance.  That would undercut the reason for her departure, which was to pursue the life she has always wanted and yearned for.  Romance is NOT the only thing in a woman’s life, despite what media has tried to drill into our heads.

What Robbie Thompson and SPN gave us instead was a woman possessed of her own goals and ambitions, who pursues them with a friend.  She goes off, not because she’s chasing a romantic relationship, but because she wants to have a certain kind of life, one filled with magic and fighting the good fight.  And she goes after that life, even though it’s filled with uncertainty and danger.  Charlie is the viewer’s avatar in many ways (addressed here by subjecttochange8) and she’s going off to live her dream, which is a beautiful message to the viewers.  And maybe it’s going to include a romantic element, maybe Dorothy will be the one for her, but that’s going to build out of friendship and be the stronger for it.  But it might not, and Charlie will still have an awesome friendship and fantastic adventures with another woman.

And that’s what makes Charlie magnificent.  That she’s a woman who aims to have a wonderful and exciting life, and who pursues that ambition.  That she’s not just interested in romance and love, though she would be open to it if it came to her.  That’s she a lesbian whose entire storyline and characterization doesn’t revolve around her sexuality.  That she’s a nerdy fan who is also self-possessed, sensible, clever and a hero in her own right.  

And that’s what makes Charlie a great character.  She defies the typical media representation of a woman, of a fan, of a nerd, of a lesbian.  She’s the best type of representation, she’s human representation.

shinyopals:

silvers-shadows:

karnythia:

madamethursday:

thatspookyquiet:

ghoulfacers:

pepperspotterybarn:

fuckyeahcordyangel:

hopesichord:

itsinthetrees:

jamesjupiter:

Charisma Carpenter talks about getting fired from Angel. Thank you for sending me this link!

This is the interview I’ve been talking about for a while.  Everyone should watch this.

Will I always reblog this?  Of course I will always reblog this.  Will I ever get over how in a single horrible, unforgivable decision Joss ruined AtS, fandom perception of Cordelia Chase, Angel/Cordelia, and pretty much all of his credibility as a feminist?  Nope.  Poor CC.  :(  Every time I hear about this my heart breaks for this woman a little bit more. 

But she and Julie Benz are the best BFF ever.  They should do adorable chick flicks together.  I would totally watch that shit.

Must watch!  Charisma tells the truth of what really happened behind the scenes at AtS, her pregnancy, her strained relationship with Joss and how she was asked to come back for the 100th episode.  I’ve known for awhile, but I know some of you may not have known what happened.

Reblogging in case anyone is still under the illusion that a) Charisma Carpenter was fired for anything other than GETTING PREGNANT and b) that Joss Whedon was ever a real, actual feminist or even a friend to women. 

Seriously, though. I wish fans and people who want to defend Whedon would listen to her talk about that she was on both shows for a combined total of eight years. Charisma was 26/27 when BTVS started out. So by the time she got pregnant with her son, she was about 31/32. 

I mean, what’s she supposed to do? Keep waiting to have a baby and live her life until the show finally runs out of steam? What if it goes for another five years? 

Also, can we please keep in mind what actually happened here: this supposedly feminist man decided to damage the career of a woman who worked for him because she made a personal choice with her own body (ie - to have a baby) because that choice didn’t line up with what he wanted her to do in order to embody his vision of a female character. And not only did he do that, but he treated her like crap and even went back on his stated promises to her. 

All because it amounted to a woman not doing what he wanted so he could have the female character on his show be just the way he wanted.

In what world does that guy get called feminist? Oh yeah, this one. 

I just feel so bad for Charisma Carpenter. I do. Because she can never tell this story straight out. She has to be really, carefully diplomatic about it and make sure to say that everything’s fine now and she’s cool and Joss is still a great guy. There’s probably way more she’ll never tell or at least not for a long time to come. Because she still can’t afford to piss Joss Whedon off. 

Because this feminist guy will, in response to a woman doing something he doesn’t like, use his power to damage her career. 

So let’s just think about that, yeah?

Oct 6

(Source: darren-criss)

Oct 1

theyreabsolute:

           (via fire-of-fire)

Oct 1

(Source: the-first-law)

On Queerbaiting and Misha’s Comments at NJCon

littlehollyleaf:

t-eyla:

"I did a convention in Seattle. I don’t know what it was I said or what transpired, I don’t know what it was. But people got upset and I feel like it was really unfair, what was said.

First of all, I think the term “queerbaiting” is not accurate. It pissed me off, because I feel like a real champion of that community with all those letters [LGBTQA] - you know, I’ve officiated gay weddings. Also, I don’t understand what the term means.”

Misha Collins at NJCon 2013

The whole quote is here on youTube.

Let me state first of all that I respect Misha a lot for this comment. I’ve rarely seen celebrities respect slash fandom to a degree where they will engage in a serious discussion about the issues slash fans bring up at cons, often in a less-than-rational fashion. So hey, go Misha. Thanks for engaging. Here’s my answer. It’s long, but keep reading. It’ll all come together in the end.

Read More

I’ve had this in my bookmarks to read for AGES but only JUST got round to it.

This sounds like a fair summary of the situation to me and why Dean/Cas becoming explicit canon, or at the very least Dean being explicitly bisexual, would be great great thing for LGBTQ+ representation (which is, in my personal opinion at least, not at ALL mutually exclusive with either or both plots being beneficial to the narrative of SPN purely for the sake of the narrative - ie. I think Dean being bi and/or getting with Cas makes complete sense for the story of the show and the characterisation of both characters and would easily fit with the tone and structure etc. of the show, irregardless of LGBTQ+ representation).

I differ over one small thing - SUBTEXT IS TEXT. IT IS IT IS. If subtext were not a legitimate, sometimes even vital, element of fiction then all English Lit classes and degrees would be pointless. SUBTEXT IS TEXT. And sometimes, sometimes, it IS in fact BETTER for certain story elements to remain subtext. Looking at things from a purely narrative POV, I do believe there IS an argument that Dean/Cas as a romance MIGHT be BETTER as a subtextual story. Though I don’t know if I agree with that argument, I consider it a valid argument.

What I 100% agree with, however, is that having queer narratives ONLY in the subtext part of the text of the majority of media is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. We NEED more explicitly textual queer narratives.

Do we need the queer narrative of Dean/Cas to be one such explicit queer narrative… I don’t know :/ I can only speak for myself and say, as I have many times, that I personally don’t need the narrative to be more than subtext, although I would LIKE it to be more. But then, unlike the OP, I’m not a member of the LGBTQ+ community, so my personal feelings on this issue are not really the most important.

The above is a good read though - if you haven’t looked it over already I recommend it x

Oh hey, I only just noticed that you reblogged this and commented on it. Sorry! I’ve not been on tumblr regularly in the past few months. But I do want to reply to your comments, so here goes.

Subtext isn’t text. If subtext were text, there wouldn’t have to be an extra word for it. I’m not trying to sound rude, it’s just that as a queer person who’s been desperately clinging to her favorite media’s subtext her entire life, this distinction is vital to me. Subtext is not text. Subtext is vital to making a story interesting, it’s an integral part of any narrative, because the point of stories is to make people think, and reflect and wonder. If you lose the subtext part of a narrative, what you’re doing is essentially selling people a 2-D drawing of a house and expecting them to live in it.

But that doesn’t make subtext text. To stay with the house metaphor, text is what the house looks like from the outside. Does it have one or two floors, does it have windows, are there curtains, is there a garden or maybe just a paved front yard. Standing outside the house with someone else, you’re both going to see the same thing. Nobody can argue with there being a garden if there is, in fact, a garden. Once you go inside, you’re on your own. Subtext isn’t tangible. You can’t look at subtext with someone else, because subtext will always be filtered through your own individual interpretation and perception. You can agree on subtextual interpretations that are likely, but … take Destiel as an example. The implication is there. It’s all over the subtext. As someone who analyzes media for a living, I know I can say with a certain level of objectivity that it’s not just crazy fangirls making shit up. But it’s not text, which means that anyone who feels like it can dismiss a queer interpretation as the rambling of crazy, sex-obsessed, teenage fangirls. (incomprehensiblemetaphor also wrote a short comment in reply to you that I thought made a very concise point of why subtext isn’t text.)

I’m not sure I can look at this from an exclusively narrative perspective, considering I’m queer myself, but even when I do try, I don’t see Supernatural being better off leaving Destiel subtext. I can’t help comparing it to the X-Files. Dean and Cas have had the same kind of relationship development as Mulder and Scully did. Mulder and Scully never got overly explicit, but it was made textual—just because they’d been playing with it for six seasons. If the X-Files PTB had just left it as it was, it would have felt like a loose end—and I feel like the same is true for Dean and Cas. Dean is portrayed as the quintessential guy-who-can’t-keep-relationships, Cas is portrayed as the fish out of the water, the odd one out who just wants to be accepted and do the right thing. The way Dean’s and Cas’ relationship has been developed, they’re being groomed to be the perfect match for each other, surviving betrayals and death and war and still coming out of all of it as very close friends. Not hooking them up, or exploring that possibility, at least, would feel like a loose end, because it’s been built up so much. Basically, SPN is past the point of getting off the pot. At this point, not making the possibility of Dean and Cas as a romantic couple textual would be a loss for the overall narrative and would destabilize its structure.

Though I sadly must agree with your latest post that I don’t believe Destiel will be made canon. It kinda looked like it might happen for a while, but judging by more recent comments made at cons and by writers, I don’t see SPN being at a point where they’re ready to go there. Unlike you, that does make me angry. Not because I feel like SPN promised me anything, but because as I said in my original post: it’s time. And SPN would be in a good position to do it. But alas, they likely won’t.

petite-madame:

Dean Winchester is saved.

My art for this month’s Spn Art Challenge. Graphite on paper + gold paint (A3 sketchbook). Enhancement in Photoshop CS6