Lady Sybil doesn’t get enough love

crankynerdgirl:

Let me take a minute to tell you about Lady Sybil.

Read More

mogoliz:

I solemnly swear that I am up to no good.

If you like it you should vote for me ! it’s the orange button with the ♥
This drawing took me forever but I guess it was worth it haha

  • East coasters: I drove through 17 states on the way to work
  • West coasters: I have been traveling in this desert for 49 years. Generations have died. Children have been born. When will I make it to the promised land
  • Midwesterners: I haven't left a 20 mile radius in 2 years
  • Texans: Are we out of Texas yet it's been 5 months
  • Floridians: Please help me there are so many oranges they are attacki–
tagged → #USA #America #driving

factsinallcaps:

HARRIET TUBMAN ESCAPED FROM SLAVERY AND THEN WENT BACK TO GET OTHERS. LIKE, I KNOW YOU KNOW WHO HARRIET TUBMAN IS AND THAT SHE DID THAT, BUT I JUST WANT YOU TO TAKE THAT IN FOR A SECOND. 

HARRIET TUBMAN WAS HELD CAPTIVE AND BOUND TO UNPAID, BACK-BREAKING LABOR SINCE BIRTH UNDER PENALTY OF TORTURE OR DEATH. SHE MANAGED TO ESCAPE THAT LIFE, AND SHE TURNED THE FUCK AROUND AND WENT THE FUCK BACK TO GET EVERYONE ELSE WHO WAS STILL TRAPPED IN IT. AND THEN SHE DID IT AGAIN EIGHTEEN MORE TIMES.

WHEN ABRAHAM LINCOLN WAS UNSURE WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS PREPARED TO MAKE A STAND AGAINST SLAVERY, HARRIET TUBMAN BASICALLY SAID HE SHOULD STOP BEING SUCH A DIAPER BABY AND THAT GUYS WHO ARE TOO SCARED TO END SLAVERY DON’T DESERVE TO WIN WARS.

NOT ONLY DID SHE SECRET OVER 300 SLAVES TO FREEDOM ON THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD, BUT SHE ACTED AS A SPY FOR THE UNION ARMY DURING THE CIVIL WAR, AND BECAME THE FIRST WOMAN TO LEAD AN ARMED ASSAULT IN THE CIVIL WAR. THAT RAID BROUGHT FREEDOM TO OVER 700 SLAVES IN ONE GO.

SO I JUST WANT YOU TO STEW ON THAT FOR LIKE A MINUTE. ACTING IN THE SHADOWS, SHE WALKED INTO HELL ON EARTH 19 TIMES TO SAVE HER FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS FROM THE TORMENT SHE ENDURED, AND THE SECOND SHE WAS GIVEN EVEN A MODICUM OF POWER, SHE MANAGED TO FREE SEVEN HUNDRED SLAVES IN ONE DAY

I GUARANTEE, HOWEVER IMPRESSED YOU ALREADY ARE WITH HARRIET TUBMAN, YOU ARE FALLING LIKE AT LEAST 40% SHORT OF HOW IMPRESSED YOU SHOULD BE WITH HARRIET TUBMAN. SHE IS ONE OF THE BEST EXAMPLES OF BADASSERY IN THE ENTIRETY OF AMERICAN HISTORY. 

"'Its tone, language, and story belong in children’s literature,' wrote critic James Wood, in The New Yorker…Days after [Donna Tartt] was awarded the Pulitzer, Wood told Vanity Fair, 'I think that the rapture with which [The Goldfinch] has been received is further proof of the infantilization of our literary culture: a world in which adults go around reading Harry Potter.'"

It’s Tartt—But Is It Art?, Evgenia Perez

I’m not really interested in the question of whether or not professional Literary Critics like James Wood (Not James Woods) consider Donna Tartt’s The Goldfinch to be High Literature. I guess they’re the people who make that decision, but it’s a decision that is largely inconsequential to me and my reading habits and the reading habits of most people. This weekend I was at Fisherman’s Wharf and I saw a youngish woman, a tourist, carrying a copy of The Goldfinch around like a baby. It was a hot day and that book is heavy, but she was reading it so hard she was lugging it around everywhere, even to buy an $8 milkshake at a burger place on the bay.

am interested in this quote, though. In the implicit horror of “a world in which adults go around reading Harry Potter.” I don’t know if James Wood wears pearls, but can’t you just picture him clutching them? It’s a funny quote to me, because if anything, what enraged me about The Goldfinch—a book I didn’t really like—was that I felt like it was nowhere near infantile enough. I agree that it seemed a bit like children’s literature, but like children’s literature in which you are required to bring your own sense of joy, wonder, and warmth (BYOJW&W?). The reason adults go around reading Harry Potter is that a lot of High Literature lacks joy, wonder, and warmth. But the world itself doesn’t. And so any story that strives to lack it tends to feel like something other that real life.

There’s been this uptick in book snobbery lately. There was that literal nonsense at Slate, which I think I’ve already made my feelings pretty clear about, and now this. It’s probably too simplistic to note that the things that unnerve literary people are the things that make money—in one case, a book written by a woman; in another, a whole subset read most voraciously by girls. I feel like I stand at a weird juncture in my literary community, with my MFA and my YA novels. On my Twitter timeline, the YA readers/writers cheer for books and readers no matter what or who they are, and the Literary readers/writers agree seem more inclined to agree with the thinkpieces. There’s an undertone of “It’s true! Most readers are stupid, and that’s why my books aren’t selling.” It’s not very difficult to choose a side when one side is so unashamed of their own snobbery. 

I was a snob once, too. When I first started writing short stories in college, I was determined to read only the best, and so I focused on the Western canon, on Hemingway and Faulkner and Jonathan Franzen; I took a small step away from my beloved Harry Potter, understanding it to be different and lesser. It went on that way for a long time, until the summer after my first year in grad school, when I picked up Kelly Link’s Pretty Monsters in the teen section of the Carnegie Library and something shifted in my brain. It was like the curtains had been parted and I suddenly saw that my whole conception of value had been formed and shaped by people who looked exactly the same (people who looked like Hemingway and Faulkner and Franzen), that the world was much bigger than that, much more interesting, and so much more fun it made me want to scream. This is the thing I can’t get over in these conversations—we talk about Literary like it’s not in itself a genre. We talk about books as if it’s just understood that there’s a Universal Good and a Universal Bad, and we act like the Universal Good is not overpopulated with while males, and we act like readers of the Universal Bad don’t know any better.  

Anyway, look. I can read and understand and appreciate High Literature, but usually I don’t. And as we should all well know, it’s our choices that show who we truly are, far more than our abilities. And what I am is happy.

(via katiecoyle)

fleeten:

don’t stare at the moon too long or else you’ll remember that nothing in this stupid fucking world makes sense

tagged → #life

wintry-mix:

jonpertwee:

Let’s do a tag game where we don’t use words, just commonly put together letters:

  • co
  • ie
  • ta
  • po
  • sc
  • si
  • bl
  • mu

Why are these so much fun?

"Girls are trained to say, ‘I wrote this, but it’s probably really stupid.’ Well, no, you wouldn’t write a novel if you thought it was really stupid. Men are much more comfortable going, ‘I wrote this book because I have a unique perspective that the world needs to hear.’ Girls are taught from the age of seven that if you get a compliment, you don’t go, ‘Thank you’, you go, ‘No, you’re insane.’"
— Lena Dunham (x)