do u ever wonder abt urself from an external pov??? bc like. everyone is p complicated and contradictory on the inside, but other ppl get a very simplified version of who u r based on ur interactions w them or what they see u doin
like if i was a cartoon character, what archetype would i be? if i was a design, if i was a DESIGNED person, what parts of me would be the most cohesive/emphasized, and which less significant traits would not be perceived at all???? its just bonkers to think abt i guess
(via t-gp)
Wayne Thiebaud (American, b. 1920), Napa Valley Ridge, 1986-97. Oil on canvas, 36 x 48 in.
(via mountaindulcimer)
(Source: tastefullyoffensive, via h0ney8ee)
Between 1985 and 2008, visitors to the lake formed by the Uribante Reservoir in Tachira, Venezuela, could catch a glimpse of a lone cross rising up out of the water. However, from 2008 to 2015, the water level started to drop substantially, revealing more of the structure that had remained underwater for decades. In 2015, the full church was in view. It once belonged to the sunken city of Potosi.
this is just amazing
(via sacredsister)
what she says: I’m fine
what she means: There was literally no narrative coherency or internal logic to Spider-Man being in Captain America: Civil War and you could have easily removed him from the plot without any impact. Why does Tony, who wanted accountability because of his guilt over innocent people dying in Sokovia, whose catalyst for siding with the government was that a grieving mother blamed him for her son’s death, recruit a child to fight in his war? Where is the narrative logic that leads him to go to a high school teenager and ask him to fight in a war he has no stakes in, implement him with his own ideals before Peter has a chance to form his own opinion, and tell him to go up against a bunch of super-powered adults? Why does no one call him out on how reckless and selfish this is? Why doesn’t anyone point out the hypocrisy of asking for accountability, then secretly recruiting a child behind their parental guardian’s back? How can the narrative paint Tony as the reasonable and responsible one in context of this? Isn’t it disrespectful to Peter’s character that he only exists to act as a snarking comic relief without any emotional impact on the plot and to disappear when the story has no longer any use for him? We could easily have allocated that screentime to focusing more on the other characters, like giving Natasha, Sharon and Wanda a proper ending to their arc, focusing more on Sam, or just working on concluding the movie in a meaningful way, instead we just get a lazy promo for the third iteration of Peter Parker’s Groundhog Day Loop from Hell.
(Source: stardust-rain, via awkwardbirds)
