reapergrellsutcliff:

REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 17,631 notes
REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 233 notes

Gangnam style!

REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 8,563 notes

emmagrant01:

aprillikesthings:

ivyblossom:

artbymoga:

Inspired by every student whose told they can’t be an artist because it doesn’t “make enough money”.

This sure sounds great. But if you scratch the surface of it, it’s actually pretty ugly.

The basic assumption here is that working class people, people who have regular jobs to support themselves and their families, somehow failed make the right choice in their lives. That or, you know, they’re just not creative people like we are.

There is nothing wrong with having a day job, or deciding that you want to have a day job to avoid living in squalor while you write your novel. No one should feel shamed because they take a job to support themselves and their families. That is a thing most of us need to do.

Every job has value. Every job can have elements of passion in it, if you are creative enough to find it. There is value in contributing to your society in whatever manner you can and in whatever manner you have to. That is not a cop out. It’s not something to fill you with regret. All work has value and honour in it, and it would serve us well to respect that instead of dumping it in the “you will regret this” box.

There are many, many ways to work and contribute to society. Not all of them involve having a formal job. Some people cannot work, but contribute through activism, supporting people around them, or asking good questions. Some people raise children to be the best people they can as their contribution. And that’s okay, right? That’s good. That’s valuable. None of that conflicts with creating art, either.

This idea that you shouldn’t have a day job if you’re a creative person is rooted in some really ugly ideas about the creativity and passion of the working class. As long as you believe that art is the kind of thing you can only do when you’re unencumbered by worries about money or a desire to feed your children, you are reinforcing very old barriers to entry. For a long time, art was considered a man’s preserve for this exact reason. Because women always had to worry about children and running a household, and real artists are too passionate and creative for mundane things like that. That’s what they have wives for! To worry about the tedious parts of life while they embrace the creative part! Bullshit!

If you are a passionate, creative person and you want to make art, make art. You can do that with a day job. You can do it with a family. Art doesn’t require you to live outside of the rest of humanity. Imagining it does only shuts doors, it doesn’t open any. Let’s not reinforce that master narrative.

Don’t ever imagine that someone working in retail or putting in their time behind a service desk isn’t as artistic, creative, and passionate as you are, or isn’t creating art, just because they opted to get a pay cheque. And don’t think you’re a failure if you need to find a job to pay your bills. Living in the world, interacting with people, seeing how systems function, that’s all fodder for your creative mill. These things can fit together. They can feed one another. And there’s no shame in it. It’s not an either/or proposition.

THANK YOU

No, I don’t want to do any of my creative hobbies for a living. Talk about a way of sucking the joy right out of them.

Mail carrying pays the bills and them some, thanks.

Also, there’s not always jobs out there for people who want to do them. Not everyone CAN follow their dreams like this art suggests. Not all jobs are a calling. Someone still has to ring up your groceries at the store and fold clothes in the mall and clean up after your meal in a restaurant, okay?

I cringed reading that comic, and then was so relieved to see the comments below it. Yes, ALL of this.

+

REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 1,108 notes

breakfastburritoe:

ur very cute and very far away please come be cute closer to me

REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 29,139 notes

Dancing Dan

REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 2,737 notes
REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 5,612 notes

dollopheadsandclotpoles:

kingonceandkingtobe:

babyintrenchcoat:

arfurr:

#WHAT IF THE FINALE ENDS LIKE THIS #BUT WITH MERLIN IN MODERN CLOTHES #AND INSTEAD OF WALKING DOWN A DIRT PATH #HE’S WALKING DOWN THE PAVED ROAD#AND A LORRY PASSES HIM #AND WHEN HE GETS TO THE END OF THE ROAD #THE CAMERA PANS UP AND OUT TO SHOW A BIG GLITTERING CITY #AND ON THE TALLEST BUILDING IS THE PENDRAGON CREST #AND THEN THE FINAL SHOT IS OF MERLIN #AND HE JUST GIVES THIS LITTLE SMIRK #AND WHISPERS UNDER HIS BREATH #’I’M HERE ARTHUR’ #’WE’RE GONNA GET IT RIGHT THIS TIME’ #AND THE MUSIC SWELLS #AND THE SCREEN FADES TO BLACK #AND I DROWN MYSELF IN MY OWN TEARS #oh god fuck guys I NEED IT TO END THIS WAY (achelseabee)

bringing this back because of the tags… good lord I am cry.

Remember when we all thought it would end happy

REMEMBER WHEN WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO END WITH THEM RE-UNITING IN THE SAME WAY like Arthur would be bullying some kid and Merlin would be like “You’ve had your fun my friend” and Arthur would be like “Do I know you?” and then it would click and they would stare at each other and it would all come back to them jfhsdjkfhskfjhkjhsfgdf

REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 5,781 notes

rotten-tears:

friendshipisalpaca:

rotten-tears:

what the heckies does “:3c” means

image

OOOOOH

REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 93,203 notes

eatpizzas:

some boys at my school started a men’s rights club so today i listened at the door to hear what they were talking about and they were arguing over how to pronounce femininity

REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 12,237 notes
REBLOG | Posted 1 day ago With 4,607 notes

tomhiddlestons:

We’re in love. We just want to be together. What’s wrong with that?

REBLOG | Posted 3 days ago With 495 notes

aureat:

if a girl ignores you she’s either hella pissed or hella sad and whatever it is you better apologize if you don’t wanna be ignored for the next 28 years