My favorite Game of Thrones men…and Gwendoline Christie because she’s beautiful.
REBLOGGING FOR WHAT THE HECK IS DINKLAGE DOING
DON’T ASK QUESTIONS
So I’m furiously cleaning my room, even though she will likely just clean it again tomorrow night.
From the paper I gave for the Societas Fontibus Historiae Medii Aevi Inveniendis, vulgo dicta, “The Pseudo Society” at this year’s International Medieval Congress in Kalamazoo, Michigan.
The abstract I sent in last September is as follows:
In light of the recent archaeological excitement surrounding the possibly exhumed remains of King Richard III, it seems an appropriate time to settle the question once and for all: What happened to the Princes in the Tower?
This paper proposes a new theory—based on several peculiar bits of marginalia found in copies of Robert Fabyan’s Newe Chronicles of England and France and several other annals from the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries—that fully exonerates the late, lamented Richard and explains how two young boys were able to vanish into thin air from the Tower of London. It also explains why, some thirty years later, the also late lamented Saint Thomas More found himself unable to complete his History of King Richard III; in short, what he discovered was too dangerous to reveal to the world, and he chose instead to leave his satirical masterpiece forever paused in the middle of a sentence.
They say the greatest trick the Devil played was convincing the world he did not exist. It turns out aliens work the same way.
The marginalia is the work of the wonderfully talented toadvineandtaylor. (She has an Etsy shop! You should buy her stuff!)
This was an awesome, awesome paper. :D
So…what I’m gathering from all of this is that next year, when I stage Richard III in a parking lot, I should end the whole thing with a big, special effects laden alien abduction. Good? Good.
Fun fact: Dustin Hoffman and Bob Hoskins decided secretly that they’d play Hook and Smee as a gay couple. When Spielberg, the director, found out, he was furious.
I just think it’s hilarious.
(Source)
One of my favorite films of all time.
Seriously. I loved this scene.
Aw, come on Steven, so what if it’s a kids movie? This was a great character choice!
National Theatre Live: Othello trailer (by NationalTheatre)
CANNOT WAAAAAAAAAAIT.
(PS Adrian Lester told me on Twitter he would include a dance number YET I SEE NO DANCING. COME ONNNN)
To hell with dignity. I’ll leave when the job’s done.
or AU where Peggy Carter becameMau my ass
221C Baker Street: vivaciousvalkyrie: 221cbakerstreet: vivaciousvalkyrie: miss-andrea:…
Making originally white characters black = Progressive
Making originally black characters white = Oppressive
So many examples of historical white figures being portrayed by black people, where no one kicks up a fuss. Yet have a white person play a black character - people lose it.
Because of the reasons posted above
did you even read it
Yes … I did read it. I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not. I assumed the original post was a parody of what a typical liberal would say …
nope, it’s serious, you’re just ignorant…
Okay. Doesn’t mean I’m ignorant though … So you really agree with the face value of the original post?
Listen, the overwhelming majority of roles in hollywood and on television are for white people- white men in particular. This means less jobs for actors of color, and less media representation for people of color. Taking roles away from people of color and giving them to white people is harmful on many levels. Taking roles away from white people and giving them to people of color- or even roles away from men and giving them to women- is progressive as it comes closer to leveling the playing field.
Could we also stop talking about “people of color taking away roles from white men.” It’s not outrageous to suggest that those people earned those roles by, I don’t know, being the best person for the part. Because that’s usually the reason why directors cast actors— any actors— in a part.
Let me tell you a thing: minstrelsy. In minstrelsy, the portrayal of black people by whites took racist ridicule and hatred and turned them into entertainment. The history of minstrelsy is long, vicious, and deeply entwined with the culture of slavery and racism. A white person playing a black character can’t disengage from that history, and will perpetuate it to some extent whether they intend to or not.
These are old tea advertisment posters that I found on an auction website. I don’t know much about them, but they sure are bloody hilarious.
GET IN MY KITCHEN RIGHT NOW
WAAANNNTTT
221C Baker Street: vivaciousvalkyrie: 221cbakerstreet: vivaciousvalkyrie: miss-andrea:…
Making originally white characters black = Progressive
Making originally black characters white = Oppressive
So many examples of historical white figures being portrayed by black people, where no one kicks up a fuss. Yet have a white person play a black character - people lose it.
Because of the reasons posted above
did you even read it
Yes … I did read it. I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not. I assumed the original post was a parody of what a typical liberal would say …
nope, it’s serious, you’re just ignorant…
Okay. Doesn’t mean I’m ignorant though … So you really agree with the face value of the original post?
Listen, the overwhelming majority of roles in hollywood and on television are for white people- white men in particular. This means less jobs for actors of color, and less media representation for people of color. Taking roles away from people of color and giving them to white people is harmful on many levels. Taking roles away from white people and giving them to people of color- or even roles away from men and giving them to women- is progressive as it comes closer to leveling the playing field.
Could we also stop talking about “people of color taking away roles from white men.” It’s not outrageous to suggest that those people earned those roles by, I don’t know, being the best person for the part. Because that’s usually the reason why directors cast actors— any actors— in a part.
