Viewing Posts tagged: diaphenia

ugh, yesterday kicked my ass. actually, the whole week kicked my ass. yesterday just pushed me over. i’ll catch up on life… eventually.

princessgeorge replied to your post “my not surprising unpopular parks & rec opinion [[MOR] i haven’t…”

I’m about the same - I’ll watch but I’ll let it pile up, and it’s just nowhere near as good as it used to be. Which still makes it an OK show. But I’m not really invested. (Aside: I need to talk to you abt Fleuvogs, will msg you!)

I feel the way I did about HIMYM — i kept watching although i didn’t really care about anyone anymore. It wasn’t until Barney’s manipulation of Robin, where he broke her down again and again, was brushed away with “oh, but it’s okay because he proposed and isn’t that the most romantic thing ever?!?” that i was so angry that I gave it up. 

I’m not angry with Parks, just disappointed. I just checked my TIVO and realized that i missed even more than I thought, and I have very little interest in checking them out. That makes me sad — I miss the excited anticipation, the ache I had for everything to come in those 30 minutes. I’m sad that at 10pm on a Thursday, i realize that I’d forgotten that Parks was even on that night.

slackmistress replied to your post “my not surprising unpopular parks & rec opinion [[MOR] i haven’t…”

I feel like it’s become about the situations and not about the characters. (I feel the same way about Community, too) That always ruins it for me.

From the Parks season premiere, I was disappointed in how the writers seemed to forget who their characters were — well, aside from RON BEING ALL-KNOWING SAGE. And with forgetting who their characters are, their character arcs and paths feel patched together rather than the deliberate and lovely arcs they’d had in seasons earlier. I agree, we don’t need wacky situations — the show handled wacky in the most entertaining and engaging way when it was placed in relatable situations. 

(Aside from the premiere, I haven’t seen Community this season, but i can see that happening.)

rikyl replied to your post “my not surprising unpopular parks & rec opinion [[MOR] i haven’t…”

That’s too bad but understandable. I don’t really trust this show like I used to, in regards to how they’re going to handle this.

I’m a big believer in “trust the tale, not the teller,” but I don’t trust the show at all. I honestly feel like the endgame is now “hey, wasn’t it funny that i wanted to be President? That was so dumb of me — HAVING BABIES IS WAY MORE IMPORTANT!” We’ve already seen them spend two seasons explaining why Ann and Chris were a bad match only to turn around and say “HEY! BABIES ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN A COMPATIBLE RELATIONSHIP! EVERYONE NEEDS TO HAVE BABIES!”

And with Diane getting pregnant, that’s three pregnancies in one season. Is it lazy storytelling or a deliberate message that the only important thing in life is to have babies? I’m just not interested in following the Ann and Leslie sharing their pregnancy/labor/child-rearing adventures. 

Part of why I’m so disappointed in that is because the show did such a wonderful job of illustrating the idea of making a family out of your friends, and now it seems to be saying that kind of family is nothing and worthless compared to the one you procreate. 

diaphenia replied to your post “my not surprising unpopular parks & rec opinion [[MOR] i haven’t…”

Fair point

I was so excited to have an awesome lady who loved her life, her husband, her relationships and was unapologetically ambitious in her career. Even if they don’t decide to make Leslie give up on her grand-scale political ambitions, they will inevitably be weighed against the “can she have it all?” question that is never, ever posed to men. 

I completely respect that Schur, Poehler et al have the right to guide their series the way they want, but I don’t know if it’s something that interested in joining along anymore. 

Saturday Apr 12 10pm  3 notes

 
 

principia-coh replied to your post:

Love it love it love it!

diaphenia replied to your post:

Hot!

fulltimeprocrastinator replied to your post:

that’s such a pretty shade of blue, i love it!!

continuants replied to your post:

that color is so perfect on you!!!! i love it!

code-name-duchess replied to your post:

SO AWESOME

lesliesotelo replied to your post:

It looks so great!

gimmesorbet replied to your post:

I love it.

Thank you all so much! I’m really happy with it — and kind of impressed with myself that I was able to dye my hair and not have it all fall out. (I tried the coconut oil method which definitely helped.)

chasingshhadows replied to your post “how i look now, in case anyone was wondering.”

LOVE IT. ughhh i want to go back to colored hair but it’s SO hard to maintain

I know! I’ve given up on reds because they’re so hard to keep. Years ago, I had permanent red dye wash out in two weeks as well. I’ve actually found semi-permanent blues that I mix in with Special Effects (which stays a very long time in my hair).

romanticalgirl replied to your post “how i look now, in case anyone was wondering. [[MOR] a lot of…”

I’ve always loved you with blue hair.
xoxo. it really does suit me the best, doesn’t it? and i figure i can wear it like this well into little old lady age. (and i will be a *little* old lady — at 5’2” i was towering over my aunts at a family gathering this weekend.)
(and yes, i know this is a blatant post of people saying nice things about me. i don’t care. you all are radiant pygmy marmosets and i so needed a boost right now.)

Wednesday Jan 22 9pm  1 note

 
 

I just found my photoshopped version of stillscape’s owl that i tried to convince her to make. and now i’m a little sad that i didn’t make everyone crazy-eyed cardigan-ed owls for my big holiday crafting initiative. 

I just found my photoshopped version of stillscape’s owl that i tried to convince her to make. and now i’m a little sad that i didn’t make everyone crazy-eyed cardigan-ed owls for my big holiday crafting initiative. 

• Posted Sunday Dec 15 5pm  2 notes

 
 

next up in"nice things for other people":

a peppy, fun mix for diaphenia: 

99 Problems — Jay-Z & Danger Mouse
Bang Bang Bang Bang — Sohodolls
Michael — Franz Ferdinand
Ooh Ooh Baby — Britney Spears
Timebomb — Old 97’S
Counting Back to 1 — Beautiful Small Machines 
[dl]

and a special mix for breakthecitysky

New In Town — Little Boots
Kiss Them for Me — Siouxsie and the Banshees
Private Helicopter — Harvey Danger
Freak Scene — Dinosaur Jr.
The Wishing Song — Tugboat Annie
Sucka MoFo — Northern State
[dl]

Thursday Nov 28 12am  8 notes

 
 

princessgeorge replied to your post: "strangers are exciting …

Happy birthday, you gorgeous creature!

thank you! xoxo

diaphenia replied to your post: "strangers are exciting …

WAIT WAS TODAY YOUR BIRTHDAY HAPPY BIRTHDAY

It twas, indeed! (i don’t always announce such things as my birthdays are often less than happy. but this was a good one.) Thanks lady!

stillscape replied to your post: "strangers are exciting …

Aww. Happy birthday!

thanks pumpkin! :)

Thursday Nov 14 2pm  2 notes

 
 

Can someone please to be writing me a fic on the drunken texts that Ben sends? Or that Leslie and Ben send? 
How about a “five times” challenge from the girl who never writes anything?
c’mon. you know you want to. i’ll even get drunk and send you texts for inspiration if you’d like, 

Can someone please to be writing me a fic on the drunken texts that Ben sends? Or that Leslie and Ben send? 

How about a “five times” challenge from the girl who never writes anything?

c’mon. you know you want to. i’ll even get drunk and send you texts for inspiration if you’d like, 

(Source: disneyladiesfromlastnight)

View HD • Posted Monday Sep 16 12pm  454 notes

 
 

In case anyone is wondering what to get me for Christmas

Silver sequin panties to add some sparkle to your holiday season. These high rise knickers are fully lined and are finished off with a silver

If you would like more options, I recommend my friend’s Booty and the Geek booty shorts. If I were 60lbs lighter, I would so be running around in these. 

(Source: diaphenia)

Posted Sunday Aug 18 6pm  4 notes

 
 

diaphenia:

herbalsmoothie:

hplssrmntc8688:

strange things are afoot @ the circle k: ryeloza replied to your post: I agree with some of this, but I read…

amypop:

ryeloza replied to your post:

I agree with some of this, but I read the more in that line more like wanting to make time for her family (Ben now, and maybe kids later) in addition to her accomplishments, not that she wanted to give up one for the other.

I disagree that the “I want…

Based on Leslie’s love for Parks, children’s concerts and being the caring loving person she is, I think having children is an easy trait to believe in her. However, since Leslie’s dating life was always awful and fleeting, prioritizing the tangibles in her life (friends, waffles and work) made more sense for where her character was at that time. Now that she is married and has had an epiphany that wow, kids are something she can have and seeing first hand how fulfilled Jerry is with his has sparked a desire to have her own. I don’t think if she’d stayed single she may never have focused on it or felt that she was missing that in her life necessarily, but now that it’s within reach what’s so wrong with her deciding she’s ready and wants that in addition to her career? She’s advancing her career and there’s no reason she can’t add another layer to her happiness by having kids. I think it’s a very in character growth arc for Leslie.

Funnily enough, I agree with both you and Amy. I don’t think it’s wildly out of character for Leslie to want kids. I think there might have been hints before (like that End of the World freakout moment), plus there have been no indications to the contrary, and she’s in her mid to late thirties and for maybe the first time (?) in the kind of lasting relationship where it would make sense to talk about having kids.

But I also definitely agree that the phrasing of “Accomplishments are great, but I want more than that” is more than a little unfortunate. I don’t know if it necessarily undermines her whole character, though I also agree that she has been all about accomplishments and wanting to be president up to this point (with a slight detour when she was willing to get herself fired for Ben). But Leslie is impulsive, so the line about accomplishments and the throwaway line “We’re always going to work” could have been said under the temporary influence of the Gergich breakfast and might not indicate a complete sea change. Nevertheless, even though I don’t see it as an irreversible change in the character, I still don’t think it was very well thought out by the writers in terms of the narrative the show usually has re: women and careers. In that sense, it’s somewhat comparable to Leslie calling Ann a “beautiful spinster”, IMO.

Above all, for me, Leslie and Ben having kids is of no interest, not because it doesn’t make any sense for them, but precisely because it makes so much sense. It is the expected narrative: marriage and then kids. If they weren’t thinking about kids, then what else would they be doing? That question, the what else, is far more interesting to me than being fed the easy narrative. I’m not a fan of spouting various and sundry writing “rules”, but in this case I think the following applies: rule of screenwriting—your first idea will probably be too obvious, so think again. The way I see it, this is where the show could mark itself once again as original and fresh, by not picking the easy route on where to go next. But it is, and that’s disappointing.

Agreed on most of this. Not to disparage anyone who has or wants kids— a group that includes most people I’m friends with, and my parents— it’s just frustrating to see yet another female character want kids. Wanting kids is fine, and I’m all for the continuation of the species, and please don’t take anything I’m saying as a slam on those people, but—

It would’ve been nice to see a childfree character. Someone who explicitly told the audience that she didn’t want kids, and then stuck by it. As someone who doesn’t want kids, I’d like to see more of that reflected on screen. And yes, I also get that there are loads of underrepresented groups missing from the media, but this doesn’t have to be an either/or thing. 

Almost twenty percent of women in the US end up childless, either by choice or by circumstance. And yet, in my own media-heavy life, I can only think of two characters (Robin Scherbatsky and Samantha Jones) who purposefully chose not to have children and discuss it on-screen. 

Leslie Knope wanting kids doesn’t seem out-of-character to me, necessarily, I think they left her open-ended enough that either decision would’ve worked for me. More than anything, I want to see the character ultimately be happy.

But I do wish her personal decision that’s brought her happiness could’ve lined up with my personal decision that’s also brought me happiness. 

Reblogging for diaphenia and herbalsmoothie's commentary, especially: 

But I also definitely agree that the phrasing of “Accomplishments are great, but I want more than that” is more than a little unfortunate… I still don’t think it was very well thought out by the writers in terms of the narrative the show usually has re: women and careers. In that sense, it’s somewhat comparable to Leslie calling Ann a “beautiful spinster”, IMO.

Above all, for me, Leslie and Ben having kids is of no interest, not because it doesn’t make any sense for them, but precisely because it makes so much sense. It is the expected narrative: marriage and then kids. If they weren’t thinking about kids, then what else would they be doing? That question, the what else, is far more interesting to me than being fed the easy narrative. I’m not a fan of spouting various and sundry writing “rules”, but in this case I think the following applies: rule of screenwriting—your first idea will probably be too obvious, so think again. The way I see it, this is where the show could mark itself once again as original and fresh, by not picking the easy route on where to go next. But it is, and that’s disappointing.

Tuesday Apr 23 11am  19 notes

 
 

my responses to diaphenia’s six+ other points

2. I also didn’t see the link, but that’s a weird and hostile thing to do, to call out a specific person

I’ve always said that. I think that it was her way to illustrate a point, but it was not a good thing to do.

3. Not being clear in her objectives. Did she want to criticize formatting alone? In that case, a primer in how to work lj, without naming names, would’ve sufficed. If she wanted to criticize poor writing, I’m not sure what the point would’ve been. We all know everyone has different talent/talent levels. How does drawing attention to that help? Was she upset about that too nice thing? Well, if she’s a writer, she’s free to seek out all the constructive criticism she wants. She can ask for a dozen betas, she can ask her commenters to be as bold as they please. But asking everyone to critique everyone else harder strikes me as fundamentally unfair. 

I don’t feel comfortable speaking to the OP’s motives and as I said before, I’m not here to defend everything that she said as I don’t agree with all of it. 

This is how it seemed to me: 

The OP wanted to have a discussion about concrit in the Parks fandom, and used the poorly formatted fic as a lead-in point. She specifically said that she had been recc’d the fic several times and that she was surprised that no one had commented on how difficult it was to read. Then she tried to start a meta discussion with the question that if we as a community don’t feel comfortable in giving criticism about something as basic and innocuous like formatting, then are we being detrimental in never giving a writer any constructive criticism.

Was it done clearly? Not really. Could have it all been phrased in a more concise way and not directly linked to a particular fic? Yep.

I’ll address the “too nice” comment below in my response to point #5.

4. I’ll flat-out admit. I’d hate to get criticism for something I wrote publicly. Privately? Fine. But I reread the comments on my fic when I’m feeling sad and hiding out in a bathroom somewhere trying to smile, and I don’t want that under my fic. Again, privately? That’s fine. I’ve never specifically sought it out, but I can take it.
But if someone read that post and thought, ah, I’ll critique saucydiva’s story with a fine-tooth comb, and post it publicly, I’d be mad.
I love having betas who will give me tough love. But I requested them. I don’t request random commenters giving me a beta job.
Which is basically what the OP was requesting on everyone else’s behalf.

I don’t think anyone is excited to be criticized publicly, especially when it’s in regard to a piece that they created be it written, a piece of art, a song, food, etc. I do think that you have completely overblown what the OP requested.

This is what she said: “I know we’re known for being one of the friendliest fandoms around, but we’re not doing the writer in question or other writers any favors by letting major problems with their fic slide. I can understand the sentiment of not wanting to offend someone, especially someone new to fanfic and/or writing, but one of the only ways writers can learn and improve is to have their mistakes constructively pointed out to them… Personally, I’m going to try to be offer a little bit more in the way of constructive criticism and I would hope that others would do the same for me and for others. Also, we have some terrific writers offering to beta read and I would hope that authors who are new to writing, fanfic, and/or this fandom would take advantage of the resource.”

Please show me wherein she said “we should all go into every fic with a fine-tooth comb, give a detailed list of everything they did wrong and post it publicly in their comments.” 

I’m not trying to be snippy here. I just don’t see how your summary of her comments matches up to what she said at all. The only thing I could find that she mentioned doing anything publicly was: “The role of constructive criticism, and how it’s delivered, has always been controversial in fandom and I don’t think consensus has ever been reached. Some believe it should be done privately, some in public.” There was no demand or declaration of what we as a community should do. 

5. Again, trying to argue that people on the internet need to be meaner strikes me as strange. If people find a story speaks to them, let it speak to them. Complaining that a person has too many comments is asinine.

Faux concern that someone will post to a larger fandom and get torn apart because we weren’t mean enough to them in our smaller community is a bizarre argument. 

I agree that the “as they move on to bigger fandoms” argument didn’t make any sense.

I think that people grabbed onto “feral fandom” and “too nice” as these rallying points to get angry about when they didn’t seem to me like anything more than a reference and an adjective. In fact, I think “too nice” was a commentary on the fact that the fandom — or rather the l_b community — generally describes itself as this happy, lovey-dovey super nice fandom, and far far nicer than every other fandom. 

I also missed where she said that people needed to be meaner. That people should offer more constructive criticism, yes, but meaner — especially being mean simply for the sake of being mean — no. I am open to being corrected. 

6. If someone wants to improve, they will find the resources to do so. Asking that we withhold praise from people we like/fic that speaks to us so that community standards on the whole will rise is a weird argument. More likely, people will get fed up and write for other fandoms. Or go outside. And even if it would actually work, that withholding comments would make more and better fic appear, most people aren’t going to agree with the methods used.

I don’t believe that a fandom as a whole has any responsibility to grow and mature anyone. 

I think that people have the ability to reach out and do something wonderful for someone else in giving them support and advice in their writing. But no one fandom will make or break someone, whether it be with praise or criticism.

7. Calling out the community as a whole for writing “mediocre” fic seemed mean-spirited. If the fic is so mediocre, feel free to stop reading it. 

I agree with you.

This is just my two cents. YMMV, etc, etc, but I think that the same post, posted under a familiar name, not calling anyone out, maybe from the perspective of someone looking to work on her OWN writing and asking for bolder critiques of her work, would’ve been met with a very different response. 

So, basically, not have said anything that she said. 

And what if she’s not a writer looking for bolder critiques of her own work but a comm participant with a thought that she wanted to share? Which is all we know as we’re not in her brain and as I said above, I don’t feel comfortable speaking to the OP’s motives. Nor do I want to make broad and furious assumptions on motivations that I am not aware of. 

You think people were getting defensive? Of course they were. She wants to change our fandom culture, in a way that may or may not result in more/better fic, but will certainly result in hurt feelings and frustration. 

Or, you know, people could not change anything. Which is what will happen. 

This is the one argument that I honestly find ridiculous and realize that I will sound as bitchy as i feel about it because THIS IS ONE PERSON WITH SOME SUGGESTIONS THAT PEOPLE ARE FREE TO IGNORE. 

She isn’t changing anything — there is no contract that we’ve all signed naming her dictator and all knowing leader. So on this point, I think we can all quit the flaily hands of “OMG! STOP MAKING US CHANGE! YOU’RE RUINING EVERYTHING! WE’RE THE NICE PEOPLE, STOP TRYING TO MAKE US BE MEAN!” 

We’re all autonomous beings right? And no one is stopping anybody from giving happy praise to fics they like. No one is going to be forced to use a beta reader and no one will be forced to take the two extra minutes to make sure that their fic is easily readable. The sky continues to be blue, the earth continues to be round and Leslie’s hair will continue to be compared to the bright, bright sun. Nothing will change and everyone will all be okay. 

Friday Mar 1 11pm  2 notes

 
 

 diaphenia said: Even if I give that to you, though, there were six other points I mentioned. The anon thing I didn’t realize at first, but I did know I’d never seen that sn before. She still was campaigning for something that wouldn’t work but would be cruel


I wrote the post at 1am and specifically addressed the fact that I was speaking to the criticism of the OP being anonymous. once I’m done with my ten million appointments today, I will respond to your six other points.

Friday Mar 1 9am  

 
 
 
 
RSS | Archive | Home