at least the colour green exists
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
sheepfilms
Fai_Ryy

cherry valley forever
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
Monterey Bay Aquarium
taylor price

Show & Tell
Today's Document
Xuebing Du
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸

gracie abrams

shark vs the universe
h
Noah Kahan
macklin celebrini has autism

oozey mess
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from Australia

seen from Lithuania

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Macao SAR China
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Ireland

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States

seen from United States
@hechiceria
at least the colour green exists

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
and its like! dont waste my time!!! the world is dizzingly full of wondrous experiences and things to do and see and even those experiences that are poor i can wring joy from through earnest discussion, but nothing can give me back the time wasted on reading or hearing a rudderless, flacid, shitty opinion from a person whose only interest is their own unexamined conclusions! not even the pretense of a dialogue!
criticisms of zendaya's acting in the odyssey seem to me to be both racist and premature (why comment on a performance you have not seen?) but beyond that, I find most criticisms of acting I see of late to be exhaustingly unstudied. The majority of opinions seem to stop merely at whether or not the actor created in the specific viewer a) a suspension of disbelief and b) an emotional reaction, and while those criteria are good and well, I find that they are as much about the viewer as the performance. On the other hand, rarely do I hear people discuss rthe physicality of performances, whether an actor has favorite bodily tools and uses them well, whether their line delivery is varied and nuanced or uncommunicative, whether the performance decisions they make are interesting, straightforward, flat, compelling, what relationships, history, and context they imply with their choices. I find it very frustrating that film criticism writ large feels that a close read of the script is sufficient as a close read of the film, or that a frame for frame parallel can be understood solely as visual stills, and I would argue that the reason a great many actors are discussed readily as celebrities and cultural figures and not as actors, ie, not as audience projections of a celebrity they like but as active craftspeople participating in a massive group project, is largely because people have no practical working idea of what it means to be acting or what tools, techniques, and frameworks an actor should have at their disposal to do the job, and what function that job has in the larger artistic project of a film in terms of conveying, yes, plot and character, but also theme, tone, mood, context, style, and emotions, where they are in fact working in concert with cinematography and set design, script and score. I am tired of the whole of an evalution of someone's performance summing up to a judgement on their appeal as a celebrity; I am tired of fickle praise for the popular and unpopular, whenever those poles trade places; I am thoroughly weary of generationally good artists reduced to their relative star power; and above all I am Sick To Death of people telling me that this is a stupid craft to care about. "Why must a movie be “good” ? Is it not enough to sit somewhere dark and see a beautiful face, huge?" Go sit in Times Square and stare at a jeans ad then. I go to a movie, and I expect a genuine attempt at art and craft.
Isis Hainsworth as Thomasina and Seamus Dillane as Septimus in Arcadia © Manuel Harlan
The Young Martyr (detail, 1856) Paul Delaroche

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Dracula by Anna Moshak
on participatory art:
Beethoven’s “Hammerklavier” sonata, first published over two hundreds years ago, is notoriously considered one of the most difficult-to-play piano pieces of all time.
In particular, when Beethoven sent it to his publisher in 1818, he allegedly said, “Now you have a sonata that will keep the pianists busy when it is played 50 years hence!”, and much has been made of the fact that it wasn’t publicly performed in its entirety until eighteen years later, by Franz Liszt himself.
Except that’s a bit of a deceptive statistic. See, when Beethoven published Hammerklavier, public solo piano recitals/concerts weren’t really a thing yet. Symphonies, sure; concertos, definitely. But sonatas were “parlor” music—a thing played by amateurs, often skilled amateurs, but amateurs nonetheless, in little sitting-rooms for a bit of entertainment after dinner, or at private salons with a guest list in the low dozens. (And mostly they were meant to be sight-read! The culture of obsessively polishing a piece to make it “performance-ready” wasn’t as much of a thing, back then.) People bought these things the way they bought novels, and, just as someone might buy a copy of Joyce’s Ulysses today and enjoy puzzling over the thing, even if they never read the whole thing or feel like they fully “get” it, well… some folks would enjoy sonatas the same way.
So yeah, Hammerklavier didn’t have its first public performance until Liszt played it in the Salle Érard. But also, Liszt basically invented the format of “star virtuoso pianist hogging the stage for two hours” in order to get a public audience at all.
But in the meantime—I think about how wonderful it must’ve been, tooling around on the piano during that 18-year-span where there was no evidence that thing even was playable, or that, if playable, that the thing even made sense. Beethoven was nearly totally deaf by this point, after all, a fact that was publicly known—had he totally lost it? people had to wonder. And the only way to find out would be… well, trying it out yourself!
It has the sound of a gimmick. And I’ll bet it was, at least a little bit—but just because something’s more interesting to play than listen to doesn’t mean it’s failing in its goal. (Though fwiw it is very interesting to listen to.)
It also has the sound of, like, Dark Souls, to be honest. Proto-video game culture. A new game drops and people are asking each other: can anyone beat this boss? can you beat this boss? do you still consider your time on the game well-spent even if you never 100% it?
Biographies generally agree that Beethoven’s metronome markings (which only appear in his later work, and only *some* of his later work) are preposterous—often borderline-unplayable, and certainly not very musical. I couldn’t find a recording of anyone trying to play Hammerklavier at the marked 138bpm tempo, so I got a computer to do it—and burst out laughing at the result because, yeah, 138bpm is fucking NUTS. But whether intentional or accidental, I love the audacity of its being there, like a taunt: I dare you to do more. I dare you to do better. I dare you to try.
Much has been made of how difficulty’s a way of keeping people out—but it’s also a way of inviting people in, I think. It says: do this hard thing and you will be rewarded. You will be rewarded in the trying. Because the trying is the thing that makes the music live; there is no music without you.
Here’s an old bit from an interview with the game designer Porpentine:
“The purpose of a puzzle [in a game] is to provide resistance. For me, that resistance doesn’t need to be coercive or challenging, just interesting and aesthetic. My mechanics are to be touched. Games are perhaps the most intimate art because the player must remain touching at all times. They must touch or the game does not exist.”
So it goes with these sonatas, too.
There's this notion that being able to stream professional theater shows will hurt the industry, because people won't go to the effort to support live theater anymore, and this is based on the anxieties of the film industry, but live theater isn't a film. The better analogy is sports.
Look me dead in the eye and tell me that people being able to sit at home and watch The Game -- the fandom that encourages, the ongoing investment over the years, the memories and traditions of Watching the Game with family and friends -- harms the ticket sales of real live go-to-the-stadium sports. Of course it doesn't. Of course all that *is the reason* that people care so much about sports they'll invest a small fortune on not only tickets but often travel costs to be part of it all in person. And the people who aren't doing that *can't* do that and weren't going to regardless, but their at-home participation and investment still boosts the profile of pro and NCAA sports as cultural institutions.
Maybe it's possible to fall in love with film and be immune to the romance of Going to the Cinema such that you'll just freely choose the same film in the comfort of your living room. It's not possible to fall in love with something that happens live and not want to be there to experience it. The consequences of procasts, for theater just like for sports, can only be A) more people motivated to make live theater part of their worlds, aka more money, when theaters everywhere could desperately use more money, or B) more love. Which is worth arguing for because reasons I assume I don't have to defend.
Victorian ruby perfume bottle available on etsy.
Yeah, I’ve heard of that show. It sounds good. I’d probably watch it if they removed 50-75% of the male characters.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Bengal Tiger | Jayanth Sharma
Cheshire Cat by Joe Wierenga
tired. exhausted, even.
and STRESSED AS ALL HELL
on another note*: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
*pick a note! any note! I'm partial to B flat and E sharp
armand can’t distinguish between interesting and boring but yearns to be interesting so he collects people with strong tastes and strong opinions and surrounds them in what they find interesting in hopes that the interest will attach itself to him through the transitive property, then when these tasteful interesting people let him know how boring he is he immediately enacts revenge.
his whole shtick with Daniel in the 70s: I’m the last interesting beautiful correct thing you see before you embrace the end. how far he goes to nurture and protect this fantasy: how the minute someone dismisses him as boring he removes everything interesting and worthwhile and lovely from their orbit and then sits there like a beautiful doll to soak up all the extra attention.
Stained glass butterfly chandelier

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Jacob Anderson as Louis de Pointe du Lac Interview with the Vampire/The Vampire Lestat | S03E04 "The Devil's Road"
tired. exhausted, even.
and STRESSED AS ALL HELL