Are you in NYC? GO TO THIS EXHIBIT and don’t take pics of it for me.
*
There is a new Bitches Gotta Eat:
so my girl julia is a professor at columbia college and, because she obviously hates her students, she forced them to read a salty book about diarrhea and being bad at sex for class credit. then she invited me to talk to them about it. BECAUSE I WROTE IT.
i’m not even going to front, knowing that my stupid butthole book is being taught in real human classrooms makes me want to send one of those holiday update letters to everyone i hate with the words HOW YOU LIKE ME NOW in 72-point bold font printed on neon green eyeball-melting construction paper.
*
The world’s greatest feminist fishmonger.
*
Evil Dead 2 is on Netflix. Mallory and I watched it yesterday, and we said a bunch of super-witty things about it you would have enjoyed. There is no upper limit to how many times you can watch and enjoy Evil Dead 2.
*
Soviet-era illustrations of The Hobbit! But…but…where’s Tauriel? THAT IS A JOKE.
*
THAT is a quotable man:
“The Whites are known sons of bitches,” says Mitch Friedman, executive director of Conservation Northwest, which has championed wolf recovery in the region. “I don’t think anyone is the least bit surprised that they remain in the news.”
*
The East Harlem explosion is getting worse and sadder by the minute.
*
I would happily listen to David Remnick do topical stand-up comedy in front of a brick wall:
IC: I want to ask about Obama, whom you have written a lot about.
DR: Who?
IC: Obama. Our first Muslim president, from Kenya.
DR: Exactly.
*
Leslie Jamison got hired by the NYTBR, and I think she’s aces.
*
The Welcome to Night Vale meets Lesbian Bed Death parody you’ve always wanted.
*
Tags: feminism, link roundup, the internet
Those illustrations are AMAZING. Gandalf looks even more like a stoned hippie than normal. Gollum is almost legitimately cute. Smaug’s eyelashes are to die for.
I do think Gollum is my absolute favorite thing about them, but Bilbo’s legs made from solid furriness definitely take second place.
All I can think about is, “where does the solid fur cover end?”
But then I think I know the answer.
Gollum looks kind of like a giant germ, or like that miserable little creature on Spongebob I’m too lazy to google.
That’s…absolutely true.
Or Snake from the Gangrene Gang!
Oh man, anybody interested in old alternate Hobbit illustrations should check out the illustrations from the Swedish version of the Hobbit, drawn by Tove Jansson, who wrote and illustrated the Moomintroll books.
I love how differently illustrators imagine Gollum. Tove Jansson drew him much larger than Bilbo, with weird seaweed fur on his head, and some kind of leafy crown, and a face like the Groke from Moomintroll.
OH, wow, those are so so so great! New favorite Bilbo!
I AM DEAD.
Wait, but I’ve already updated my profile picture here (or at least tried to, silly picture system) AND on FB with the Soviet gollum, what if I click through and then totally have to change it again?
*clicks* dammit
So thrilled to see these. Maybe the Getty could be persuaded to curate an exhibition of Hobbit and LOTR illustrations from the worlds artists.
LATE BREAKING LINK OF GREAT IMPORTANCE
I am on board with this, as long as Rombledore is included as well.
YES. My first thought on reading that link was “I want to read the second set of novels, set in the distant future after Harry has come to terms with his immortality.” But those novels must now be set a few decades away, as a forever-seventeen Harry comes to the realization that his aging friend must be sent back in time to prevent the time paradox.
After reading that a few days ago, I imagined a sequel set where Harry, after centuries of weary immortality, finally confronts his greatest fear and allows himself to be subjected to a Dementor’s Kiss, knowing it is the only way he can die.
There’s a bullshit comment on this about how the proposed ending would be “too dark for 12 year olds.” UH, NO. They need to learn sometime that nothing awaits but the infinite abyss!
srsly
My daughter is 11 and she is already talking to me about existentialism and how death works from a medical point of view. She’s already experienced the death of a loved on. We can’t pretend that we’ll live forever*…or I guess we can, but then we’re cowardly dolts who can’t deal with the unpleasant or the inevitable.
ETA: live forever in this life, anyway – afterlife scenarios debatable.
Loved one, argh.
(Wonder how you can be loved on?)
For what it’s worth, one of the girl’s on Teen Mom talked about “lovin’ on” her daughters and it has since crept into my vocabulary…
I taught in elementary and jr. highs for two years, and I find 10, 11, and 12 year olds to be among the most clear-eyed people I’ve ever met. They’re old enough to know the shape of the world, in a general sense, but haven’t yet entered into the (necessary) self-absorption of the teenage years, and they don’t carry the weights and responsibilities of adulthood. They’re not particularly deep or insightful, because they’re still so young, but they are sharp and ready to learn.
Honest to God, 11-year old Osutein was probably better equipped to handle a dark end to the Harry Potter series than 33-year old Osutein.
That entire thread is ridiculous. Mr Pierre whatever wants everyone to conform to only his standards and everyone else isn’t using the logical thought processes of a “mature mind” and ahahaha no.
Immortality is way more terrifying than death. It also makes you an asshole (cf. every ancient Greek and Roman myth).
Immortality is the worst curse of all. This is the Sartre ending
My daughter, husband and I have discussed this at length. The phrase “the gift of men” may have come up a few times, because we are all Tolkien nerdlets.
Yes! Tolkien’s “the gift of men” is such a beautiful cosmology.
Your family sounds awesome.
I have to say, when I was in elementary school — and a regular Sunday School goer — I used to lie in bed at night having mini-panic-attacks at the thought of heaven and how very, very, very, very long forever is. I am fairly terrified of the void, but I am also horrified at the thought of going on FOREVER, even in unchanging bliss.
When I got worried about how long forever was, I imagined an infinite library.
It was exceedingly comforting.
Funny, I used to have those same mini-panic attacks in elementary school, although I was brought up Unitarian. The idea of eternity was just mind-blowing and horrifying, whether you spent it in heaven, hell or nowhere.
I finally got over myself and found some comfort by positing that when you’re in the afterlife, time as we think of it doesn’t really apply. We’re outside of human time, and able to live all moments, all the time. (Or something – the details are still sketchy, even years later.)
see also: Douglas Adams http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Bowerick_Wowbag…
But .. but … Harry didnt kill Voldemort. Voldemorts death spell rebounded on himself because of the Elder Wand.
Oh yes I am this pedantic.
Also its breaking my heart imagining Harry watch as all his loved ones die away, presumably not realizing he is immortal for quite some time. Guess he can become bros with Nearly Headless Nick?
Can I be more pedantic?? The prophecy says EITHER must die at the other’s hand. Not BOTH must die. EITHER = either one or the other.
I’m not saying that the proposed ending wouldn’t be super compelling (it would!!), but this argument for it does require us to misunderstand English.
So, actually, the fact that Voldemort technically killed himself might be more of an argument for immortal Harry.
Yeah, I see where the person was coming from with their theory (and think it’s awesome), but I can’t get over how that is literally not what that word/sentence structure means. It’s just not. Sorry :/
I would like to second the “awesome theory/frustrating manipulation of how words work” position. I especially like the “Boy Who Lived” title becoming a tragic one, but…it does not work.
I’d personally gone into the 7th book thinking there was going to be a prophecy twist, but that it was going to be that Harry was a Horcrux and had to sacrifice himself. But then, Neville would turn out to have been the real subject of the prophecy and take out Voldemort (I can work around the ‘being marked as an equal’ thing without doing much violence to the meaning of words, and only slight violence to the plot. It doesn’t specify PHYSICALLY marked, and there are different ways of being equal..,)
Well, I agree generally that we can take for granted the common understanding of “either,” but also remember that there is another sense of “either” that is indeed close to “both.” –Ex. “Students, please line up on either side of the desk.” i.e., form two lines, one one each side of the desk. So, as a flight of imagination, it’s quite possible.
Well, Voldemort kills Harry, but because of the Horcrux embedded in Harry, he destroys the Horcrux and Harry has the choice to return or to come back. And then they have their final battle and the Elder Wand comes into play.
But also, as @tibia_ says, the prophecy is “either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives”. So one of them has to die in order for the other to truly live, and it has to be at the hand of the other. Also, you know, there’s the whole part about the ways in which prophecies are what we make of them, i.e. Neville could also have been the one to destroy Voldemort (and was certainly instrumental in doing so), but Voldemort made Harry the one the prophecy is talking about BECAUSE he chose Harry. If Voldie had just been all “pssh, whatever, crazy prophets are always spouting nonsense” and gone about his business of world domination, he might have had a longer run.
I did love that entire speech about how the prophecy only had credence due to the import that they chose to give it
i really want to see that russ & daughters movie as soon as possible.
ALSO, Mallory and I watched three episodes of Broad City last night and lost our fuckin’ mindssssssss
FUCK YES, Broad City– those women are berserk and incredible and I love never, ever being able to predict what the punchline will be. And Lincoln! He’s beyond charming.
Oh I am so glad The Toast is a place where I can obsess about Broad City.
It really is just the best, isn’t it? I haven’t watched the web series but am saving it for someday soon when I am trapped under a newborn.
Broad City!!! It is beyond any greatness I could have possibly imagined.
YES BROAD CITY I yammer on about it at length to everyone I meet. I’m so glad (but not surprised) other Toasties watch it too.
I obviously disapprove of the murder of majestic wolves but the possibility of being described in the media as “known sons of bitches” makes me want to raise a gang of miscreant children.
i totally aspire to be a known sons ofa bitch.
That guy sounds straight out of an Annie Proulx story. Actually that whole saga does!
I was doing that BEFORE it was cool.
I’m not really sure why they’d want to poach wolves and ship the skins to Canada since the trappers up here say they go for so cheap it isn’t worth trapping them, but I really really want to see a gritty Justified-style show about a family of “known sons of bitches” poaching in the rural northwest.
The Neue Galerie is the nicest museum. It is just the right size (not to big) and they have a lovely permanent collection.
They also have an amazing Viennese cafe with beer and wine and amazing desserts. You don’t even have to go to the museum to get some sachertorte! Highly recommended, A+, should go.
*too
Good lord. Sorry folks.
There are lots of things in the David Remnick article but just, do people still do this? Really?
[His wife enters the living room and asks for fifty dollars.]
IC: Is that on the record?
DR: The fifty dollars is on the record.
I really want to make “HOW YOU LIKE ME NOW,” update letters. It’d be cute to send one to my mom because she’d be like, “Well, I like you a lot more now that you don’t live with me and support yourself financially. Dad and I were able to buy a house in Maine!”
Just saw this Dinosaur comic, I believe it is relevant to the interest of all Toasties/Sherlock fans.
“This reads like historical fiction that decided half-way through it was going to be erotica.”
WELCOME TO THE INTERNET
“Hey, you ever think about how being alive is kinda gross and weird?”
“Dude. ONLY ALL THE TIME.”
Me too, dude, me too.
(And I love that Frankenstein’s Monster wants to be called Katelyn.)
Brilliant!
Thank you.
I enjoyed this post by Kirstyn McDermott, Feminism, Anger and Silicone Dolls : http://champagneandsocks.com/2014/03/12/guest-pos…
Also, I’m a whole lot more interested in the Night Terrace audio series kickstarter since finding out it’s going to star Jackie Woodburne, aka Susan from Neighbours. Ahh, nostalgia… https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/labcoatman/n…
KNOWN SONS OF BITCHES.
That is beautiful language and a sad story.
I just can’t get over that the Cyrillic form of “hobbit” looks to us Roman-alphabetters like XOBBNT. Someone needs to make a black-metal-wizardrock band stat! I will buy your t-shirts!!
Worse than people taking photos of art and getting all up in your way are people taking photos of the info placards! Why! More than once I’ve been at museums where people walk up…look at the art…photograph it…photograph the placard…ad naseum throughout the whole exhibit. The worse offense I saw of this was someone taking iPad photos of the info display at the Pearl Harbor memorial over the USS Arizona. STOP NO WHY. (otherwise most people there were very respectful, which pleasantly surprised me, which I then got sad at my low expectations of American public behavior :/).
TL;DR Museums + photos = no.
I do that occasionally if there’s an artist/painting I haven’t seen before and really like. I always lose paper and I have a terrible memory for names. But yeah, taking photos of paintings and their placards just to record that you’ve looked at them is silly.
When I lived in Paris, I sometimes went to the Louvre for an hour or so just to look at a couple rooms in depth (I could go for free). I watched tourists literally speedwalk, cameras held in front of them, and take photos of every single thing they passed while barely glancing at the actual thing.
The David Remnick interview:
IC: As an editor, where do you insert yourself most heavily?
baaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahhahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Wow, that degenerate art exhibit looks amazing. I wrote a paper in grad school comparing classical music/composers under totalitarian regimes (i.e, Hitler and Stalin) and that term came up often in both societies.
Now all I want is a pound of lox and a half pound of whitefish salad. And two dozen bagels.
By documenting the artist's name and title of the piece you're "missing the point'? Really?
I understand why Bitches Gotta Eat doesn’t have a comments section, but I wish it did so I could sycophantically suck up to her after every post and lavish her with praises about how awesome and hilarious she is.
If you are photographing everything, yes, you are. Because you're sitting there adjusting your lenses, getting in people's way, and disturbing others with your DSLR noises (which can sometimes be incredibly distracting) – not to mention degrading the actual art, if it's sensitive to light and your flash is on – and not actually appreciating any art. I've taken a photo or two of something I've really liked, and then gasp! because I really liked it! made the effort to remember who it was by/what it was called (…or wrote a note). I do not go around an entire exhibit photographing each piece of art and it's accompanying information, which I have seen people do and find obnoxious.
I think people taking a million photos at museums is akin to someone filming a ballet, or orchestra – would you get up in the aisle with your video camera there?
I did not think taking photos in a museum would be the hill I'd die on today, but here I am.
Take a note on your phone if you're bad with paper! Even not-smartphones usually have a space for notes (or you can text it to yourself). I did that at an exhibit recently where there were a bunch of artists who I wanted to see more of.
Criminy, “Bitches Gotta Eat” guess where I’ve been ever since you told me?