Updates

Write you updates here


Write your updates here
Write your updates here

slamigos:

do you ever see somebody say something about a character and you just want to stick your upper half through the computer, grab their face and whisper,

“no

you

completely

missed

the point

of that character” 

and then slowly slide back into the computer while staring at them


oh, how I love the “I don’t understand why that happened, so it’s a plot hole in terrible, lazy writing" thing on this site

also, bit fan of the “this character is not someone I can relate to, so it’s a poorly written and unrealistic character" often paired with "terrible representation

that’s what critical thinking is all about


September 1 | 10:07 | 2♥

cedricdigory:

Have a nice ride back home!


Friendly reminder that anyone born between 1985-1998 didn’t get their hogwarts letter because Voldemort’s ministry wiped out the record of muggleborns


msaliddell:

thetwogaydetectives:

So Magnussen never directly threatens Sherlock, literally has no intention to ever personally harm him, yet we all agree he is an evil villain and 6/10 don’t like him.

Yet Mary who SHOT and killed Sherlock, Mary who has murdered people, Mary who lied to her husband, Mary who would hurt Sherlock again is just misunderstood and we are misogynists for believing she is a villain

Wow

I think there’s something interesting going on in the text here. Magnussen openly behaves in a repellant, disgusting, unnatural way because he can get away with it. Mary affects charm and pleasantness because she needs those things to help her keep the position she’s created for herself.
People will happily say that Magnussen deserved what he got because he was gross, even though we never see him harm anyone. Meanwhile cute funny Mary has defenders out the wazoo despite the fact that she shot the protagonist in the chest.
So much of this show is about learning to look past the most obvious level and learning to disrupt the facade. It’s just majorly tripping me out right now.

Also, Magnussen is a bully - someone most of us have had the bad fortune of dealing with on a daily basis, so we know the deal - but Mary is a traitor. She wasn’t supposed to be this, she was supposed to be on our side, and she let us down. 


tchy:

dark-vowelled:

sclez:

durendals:

there is literally no difference between academic scholars discussing their interpretations of a text and a bunch of people yelling YOUR HEADCANON IS WRONG at each other

As a Masters student I can vouch for this.

The difference is citations.


September 1 | 7:42 | 45612♥ | earlgreytea68 | durendals

a seven nation army couldn’t hold me back


September 1 | 7:42 | 18276♥ | sweettasteofbitter

theenigmaofriversong:

capaldiem:

there are two types of people in this world

  • people who think the doctor pushed the droid
  • people who think he jumped

No, the question isn’t was he pushed or did he jump.

The question is does it make a difference.

Answer, of course it doesn’t. The droid wouldn’t have even thought to jump nonetheless have made the decision to if the Doctor hadn’t put the idea in his head. I mean that droid was dead set on staying alive.

The question is is it worse to murder someone or manipulate them into killing themselves.

And if we look at what’s been said in the show,

I’ve taken lives. I got worse. I got clever. Manipulated people into taking their own.

Because I killed, and I caused to have killed. I sent young men and women to their deaths, but here I am, still alive and it does tend to haunt you. Living, after so much of the other thing.

the answer is a very close draw.


September 1 | 7:42 | 458♥ | madqueenalanna | capaldiem

sherlock-undercover:

Granada Holmes : The Dancing Men (1984)

"John Watson, you keep me right" - The Sign of Three (BBC Sherlock)



warmth-and-constancy:

When you take characters’ actions and motives out of the context of the narrative and examine them according to real-world contexts or through sociopolitical lenses to the extent that certain people are doing, you’re ignoring the writers’ intentions as far as presenting certain characters as heroes and others as villains, etc., which can be a useful exercise in an academic setting but is really fucking tedious in a fandom setting and is something you should really reconsider using as the foundation of your argument for why every single person in a particular fandom who accepts the writers’ narrative and characterizations on their own terms or likes or dislikes certain characters in ways which are supported by the narrative is a Bad Person.

And speaking as someone who has examined fictional things according to real-world contexts in an academic setting…you wouldn’t be getting particularly high marks for failing to demonstrate an understanding that the real world and the world created by the author are in fact separate and different.

I fucking love you. 


September 1 | 3:56 | 30♥ | warmth-and-constancy

deducingbbcsherlock:

F*ck my conspiracy? No.

cartopathy:

[thanks to ceywoozle listening to my ideas, and loudest-subtext-in-television for beta reading this sucker]

A recent essay lists arguments summing up problems with TJLC in relation to queer representation on television, and how—should TJLC be real—it would be (and is)…

Really well said. Thank you in particular for pointing out that in the end, it really does seem like many TJLCers and anti-TJLCers are so passionate about this topic for the same reason – a desire for the right kind of queer representation in the media. I think that because the majority of TJLC related posts floating out there are brief (headcanons, gifs, and the like) and are often silly or (knowingly) exaggerated, while the posts that get to the meat of what TJLC really is are long and require a careful read, there’s an understandable misinterpretation of what the “conspiracy” is actually about.


SML