rutobuka2:

a lowkey (pre-relationship) bagginshield sketchdump from my patreon

  1. wannabe epic hobbit and dwarf 
  2. Bilbo helping Thorin get out of his barrel after they escape Mirkwood (based on the book)
  3. Bilbo finding Thorin cute while sharing breakfast during the quest :3
  4. Bilbo sharing food with Thorin from @avelera‘s Prayers to Broken Stone
  5. Thorin getting rained on and making Bilbo laugh 😹♥
  6. “when will senpai Bilbo notice me?”
  7. Bilbo treating Thorin’s wounds 
  8. from a project of @ahiddenkitty‘s, Bilbo co-sulking with Thorin
  9. from the same project (with a similar pose), Bilbo thirsting at Thorin :D♥

Meta Monday

fangirlunderground:

Thanks, everyone, for letting me take a little break. As promised, I’m back, and I come bearing meta about everyone’s favorite pansexual, genderfluid Norse God and/or alien prince, Loki! 

It’s funny, because I’d already started on this post before my break, but then we got such great Loki content from Tom Hiddleston’s panel at ACE, including confirmation of MCU Loki’s gender and sexuality and discussion of his traumatic history, both of which should have just been addressed in the films, but it’s something. (And, are we not all that kid who asked if Loki was really, really dead?)

I’m keeping the focus on MCU Loki today, too, with meta covering every movie from Thor 1 to Avengers 4, as well as his relationships with Odin, Thor, and even himself. Basically, this is a whole lotta Loki

I hope you enjoy it and find it all as interesting as I did. As always, be sure to like and reblog the original authors, and let me know if you’d be interested in a Thor-focused follow up next week? 

Marvel – Loki

Analysis of Thor and Loki’s Characters in Their Childhood by @lucianalight, “Loki has stabbed Thor since they were children!” “Loki tried to kill Thor his entire life!” These assumptions came after TR tried to retcon everything about Thor franchise and characterizations. […] Loki was never as evil and wrong as TR portrayed him. Neither Thor was like a saint and always right. Their relationship is far more complicated than good Thor vs. evil Loki. I don’t accept TR retconning their characteristics like this. Especially when there’s proof that TR’s interpretation of them is wrong. (Mirror Link)

I am never going to be over Loki literally being the most decadent king he can by @thorkizilla, […] I am never going to be over Loki literally being the most decadent king he can, that he’s literally watching theatre in his bathrobe while eating grapes and drinking wine. A play about himself, cast in the best possible light, just after we’ve seen the giant statue of him in the main thoroughfare. (Mirror Link)

I love you, my sons. by @iamanartichoke, This is such an interesting contrast in reactions between Loki and Thor with the context of Odin’s quote, because you can tell that while Loki is taken aback, shocked, and even saddened by these words, Thor is still reeling from the revelation of Hela and impending Ragnarok and it doesn’t seem like Odin’s words even really register to him. (Mirror Link)

Loki acted out of a desperate need to prove his worth in Thor (2011) by @iamanartichoke and @lookforastar, […] Because as much as Loki’s trying to prove himself and make his father proud (as Frigga tells him to do), there’s the the constant undercurrent of Loki trying to grapple with what he is.  Yes, he is trying to prove himself as the second son now that he’s out of that shadow, but he’s also trying that he is capable as King despite his Jotun nature. (Mirror Link)

Loki and Thor: Back to Square One, for Better AND for worse by @icyxmischief and @chiliadicorum, […] The way I see him behaving in Ragnarok is honestly, with a few subtle variations, the way he behaved in Thor 1, to the extent that he and Thor “reconciled” by revisiting their roles, and personalities, before Loki developed for the worse, and Thor for the better.  While Loki is less secure in his place in his family in Thor 1, to be sure, and this produces jealousy that he has wholly put to rest as of Ragnarok, and while I AGREE  that his character arc has been phenomenal and gripping, I have reservations about the idea that Loki is 100% satisfied with his life at the end of Ragnarok. He’s come a long way, but I still feel as if he exhibits more resignation than resolution, which speaks to the notion that he and Thor have indeed come full circle, but not entirely in positive ways. (Mirror Link)

Loki’s Characterization by @portraitoftheoddity[…] You’ve already touched on a really core component of Loki’s character, anon, which is that he is a great big mess of Contradictions with a capital C. He wants to be loved. He wants to be feared. He wants to destroy and he wants to be a savior. He wants the throne, and he just wants to be an equal. His methods and actions often seem at odds with his stated desires and goals. And for all that he’s depicted as the ‘god of chaos’ because of the results of his villainy, you could just as easily make an argument for the chaos being internal. (Mirror Link)

Loki is almost certainly still alive by @avelera, The most frustrating thing about pointing out that Loki is almost certainly still alive is the number of people who give you the Look ™ of assuming you’re an obsessed Loki-stan who was crying in the theater because of his death. NGL guys, I think Loki is a great character. I was definitely bummed by that opening. But I’ve also seen that film 3 times now because I’m a loser and I can tell you with like 90% certainty that Loki is still alive. Observe. (Mirror Link)

Loki’s Relationship with Odin by @fancykraken, […] I know that other’s have probably said this more eloquently, but for me, I gotta say that the revelation about Hela and her and Odin’s background made everything just click in terms of Loki and the way he was raised, treated, and the family dynamic. It especially explains so damn much about the dynamic between Odin and Loki. (Mirror Link)

Loki spent the first part of his reign as Odin grieving for Frigga by @delyth88 and @fandom-and-feminism[…] It really speaks volumes about Loki that he chose not to lash out after taking over. We all saw the aftereffects of his magical tantrum in his cell, and how maniacally he fought against the dark elves. If Loki truly were evil or a real villain he would have continued a reign of tyranny as soon as he took the throne. What did he do? (Mirror Link)

“Satisfaction is not in my nature.” by @oneformischief, I’ve been thinking about this line a lot. And I’m not sure it’s given all the credit it deserves. It is well overshadowed by Thor’s immediate response (surrender’s not in mine”), and by the line that steals this whole scene: “Trust my rage.” But there’s something about this line that gets me, and I think it’s because it is probably the truest thing Loki has ever said about himself. (Mirror Link)

“You lack conviction.” by @taaroko, Okay I want to talk about Loki’s plan in Avengers. […] Strap in, because this might be long. I do not think it was Loki’s intention to lose the Battle of New York…but I do think he considered getting defeated by a group that could go on to defeat Thanos an acceptable alternative. Basically, to survive, he either needs to impress Thanos by winning or lose in such a way that Thanos can’t get his hands on him. Either way, he’s still going to be in someone else’s power, so there isn’t a truly triumphant outcome possible for him. (Mirror Link)

grammarmancer:

thatadult:

The system is corrupt and voting people in doesn’t fix it but y’all literally reblog shit every day that could be fixed with local policy that is already fixed in other states and counties. You can literally vote and also do grassroots work and community work and revolutionary work ALSO. Like they don’t cancel each other out you are not being w revolutionary by not participating and hurting disabled and elderly people in your community and students etc. by not voting locally like shut the fuck up

Also voting a LOT will fix things. If everybody was voting in every election they could, from school board to president, real change can happen. People can’t just vote for president and maybe senate and then claim that voting is pointless. 

rivendellrose:

americanphancakes:

deborahthejudge5777:

fountainfinity:

things people do in real world dialogue:

• laugh at their own jokes

• don’t finish/say complete sentences

• interrupt a line of thought with a sudden new one

• say ‘uh’ between words when unsure

• accidentally blend multiple words together, and may start the sentence over again

• repeat filler words such as ‘like’ ‘literally’ ‘really’ ‘anyways’ and ‘i think’

• begin and/or end sentences with phrases such as ‘eh’ and ‘you know’, and may make those phrases into question form to get another’s input

• repeat words/phrases when in an excited state

• words fizzle out upon realizing no one is listening

• repeat themselves when others don’t understand what they’re saying, as well as to get their point across

• reply nonverbally such as hand gestures, facial expressions, random noises, movement, and even silence

Excellent sticky note for dialogue writing in fiction. 

All of this. I get a lot of compliments on my dialogue and this list pretty much covers what I do (but some of it, I didn’t even realize I did, lol). I highly recommend reading your dialogue aloud (or imagining it in realtime like a movie scene) to see if it feels natural, which is what I do when editing.

First, let me put on my transcriptionist hat and say you’re damned right they do all of that (and it’s annoying as fuck when you’re trying to transcribe an interview). 

Second, let me put on my editor hat and say that this kind of thing should be used very carefully in writing. A little for characterization is good. But dialogue in a book (or TV show, or whatever) is not at its best when it’s 100% naturalistic exactly as it happens in real life, if for no other reason than that 90% of conversations in real life are, frankly, pretty boring. 

ABSOLUTELY read your dialogue out loud to hear if it sounds natural. Absolutely listen to how people really talk and try duplicate that in practice pieces. Then dial it back at least a few steps when you’re doing writing that you actually want people to read, because a lot of ums and uhs and repeated words or phrases are totally realistic, but also super annoying to dig through while you’re reading dialogue in a book. Use it for effect, not just to be realistic.

Drafting: The Theory of Shitty First Drafts

wrex-writes:

Writing books often exhort you to “write a shitty first draft,” but I always resisted this advice. After all,

  1. I was already writing shitty drafts, even when I tried to write good ones. Why go out of my way to make them shittier?
  2. A shitty first draft just kicks the can down the road, doesn’t it? Sooner or later, I’d have to write a good draft—why put it off?
  3. If I wrote without judging what I wrote, how would I make any creative choices at all?
  4. That first draft inevitably obscured my original vision, so I wanted it to be at least slightly good.
  5. Writing something shitty meant I was shitty.

So for years, I kept writing careful, cramped, painstaking first drafts—when I managed to write at all. At last, writing became so joyless, so draining, so agonizing for me that I got desperate: I either needed to quit writing altogether or give the shitty-first-draft thing a try.

Turns out everything I believed about drafting was wrong.

For the last six months, I’ve written all my first drafts in full-on don’t-give-a-fuck mode. Here’s what I’ve learned so far:

“Shitty first draft” is a misnomer

A rough draft isn’t just a shitty story, any more than a painter’s preparatory sketch is just a shitty painting. Like a sketch, a draft is its own kind of thing: not a lesser version of the finished story, but a guide for making the finished story.

Once I started thinking of my rough drafts as preparatory sketches, I stopped fretting over how “bad” they were. Is a sketch “bad”? And actually, a rough draft can be beautiful the same way a sketch is beautiful: it has its own messy energy.

Don’t try to do everything at once

People who make complex things need to solve one kind of problem before they can solve others. A painter might need to work out where the big shapes go before they can paint the details. A writer might need to decide what two people are saying to each other before they can describe the light in the room or what those people are doing with their hands.

I’d always embraced this principle up to a point. In the early stages, I’d speculate and daydream and make messy notes. But that freedom would end as soon as I started drafting. When you write a scene, I thought, you have to start with the first word and write the rest in order. Then it dawned on me: nobody would ever see this! I could write the dialogue first and the action later; or the action first and the dialogue later; or some dialogue and action first and then interior monologue later; or I could write the whole thing like I was explaining the plot to my friend over the phone. The draft was just one very long, very detailed note to myself. Not a story, but a preparatory sketch for a story. Why not do it in whatever weird order made sense to me?

Get all your thoughts onto the page

Here’s how I used to write: I’d sit there staring at the screen and I’d think of something—then judge it, reject it, and reach for something else, which I’d most likely reject as well—all without ever fully knowing what those things were. And once you start rejecting thoughts, it’s hard to stop. If you don’t write down the first one, or the second, or the third, eventually your thought-generating mechanism jams up. You become convinced you have no thoughts at all.

When I compare my old drafts with my new ones, the old ones look coherent enough. They’re presentable as stories. But they suck as drafts, because I can’t see myself thinking in them. I have no idea what I wanted that story to be. These drafts are opaque and airless, inscrutable even to me, because a good 90% of what I was thinking while I wrote them never made it onto the page.

These days, most of my thoughts go onto the page, in one form or another. I don’t waste time figuring out how to say something, I just ask, “what are you trying to say here?” and write that down. Because this isn’t a story, it’s a plan for a story, so I just need the words to be clear, not beautiful. The drafts I write now are full of placeholders and weird meta notes, but when I read them, I can see where my mind is going. I can see what I’m trying to do. Consequently, I no longer feel like my drafts obscure my original vision. In fact, their whole purpose is to describe that vision.

Drafts are memos to future-you

To draft effectively, you need a personal drafting style or “language” to communicate with your future self (who is, of course, the author of your second draft). This language needs to record your ideas quickly so it can keep up with the pace of your imagination, but it needs to do so in a form that will make sense to you later. That’s why everyone’s drafts look different: your drafting style has to fit the way your mind works.

I’m still working mine out. Honestly, it might take a while. But recently, I started writing in fragments. That’s just how my mind works: I get pieces of sentences before I understand how to fit them together. Wrestling with syntax was slowing me down, so now I just generate the pieces and save their logical relationships for later. Drafting effectively means learning these things about yourself. And to do that, you can’t get all judgmental. You can’t fret over how you should be writing, you just gotta get it done.

Messy drafts are easier to revise

I find that drafting quickly and messily keeps the story from prematurely “hardening” into a mute, opaque object I’m afraid to change. I no longer do that thing, for instance, where I endlessly polish the first few paragraphs of a draft without moving on. Because how do you polish a bunch of fragments taped together with dashes? A draft that looks patently “unfinished” stays malleable, makes me want to dig my hands in and move stuff around.

You already have ideas

Sitting down to write a story, I used to feel this awful responsibility to create something good. Now I treat drafting simply as documenting ideas I already have—not as creation at all, but as observation and description. I don’t wait around for good words or good ideas. I just skim off whatever’s floating on the surface and write it down. It’s that which allows other, potentially better ideas to surface.

As a younger writer, my misery and frustration perpetuated themselves: suppressing so many thoughts made my writing cramped and inhibited, which convinced me I had no ideas, which made me even more afraid to write lest I discover how empty inside I really was. That was my fear, I guess: if I looked squarely at my innocent, unvetted, unvarnished ideas, I’d see how bad they truly were, and then I’d have to—what, pack up and go home? Never write again? I don’t know. But when I stopped rejecting ideas and started dumping them onto the page, the worst didn’t happen. In fact, it was a huge relief.

Next post: the practice of shitty first drafts

Ask me a question or send me feedback!

I’m at a one week writing workshop this week guys so just FYI I do apologize if it takes me time to respond to stuff (especially comments, please know they are the light of my life and I already read it 20 times) or if I seem distant. Just got a lot happening right now but I appreciate everything!