deviant ART

[x]
Subscribe Now | Buy deviantWEAR | Advertise Here

~fegie:iconfegie:

Caitlin  
[x]
Subscribe Now | Buy deviantWEAR | Advertise Here

wrock!

Journal Entry: Tue Jul 1, 2008, 1:23 AM
mood: enthusiastic xD

So yesterday, for the first time in about two years, we finally saw Harry & the Potters again, along with Uncle Monsterface & Math the Band at the Unlimited Enthusiasm Expo/ Camp Jump & Yell! Filmed a lot of it, & my head & legs hate me a lot right about now, but am oddly awake now. (And listening to HatP's most recent CD.) But, all things considered, am not going to give an in-depth recount (as if anybody cares; hehe), just that... it was brilliant. Balloons, inflatable lobsters, guitars, & dragons, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, the Goonies, & three bands... all from 7-11 in DC in a surprisingly well-ACed & spacious club. (Which is good.)

No Comments
  • Mood: Tense
  • Listening to: Nightfall-- Blind Guardian
  • Reading: Dracula-- Bram Stoker
  • Playing: DK RPG :)
  • Drinking: water

Devious Journal Entry

Journal Entry: Sun Jun 29, 2008, 10:33 PM
Oh, DA. Still broken with the mood (still can't change) & galleries (still can't go to next pages)? Oh well.

So there is a book titled Why You Can't Teach Art or something to that effect. Looked through it, because, really, the statement makes some sort of sense. But all i got out of flipping through the book was that there are people who give insanely rude critiques. Of course, think part of the author's point was that crits are largely exercises in futility, how they never go very deep, &c., &c., but some of the crits that were brought up were just ridiculously harsh. Maybe i've just been sheltered, having gone to Carver, where everybody likes to ramble on about respect, but never would a teacher tell someone a piece bored them, or speak about someone's piece in a way that said they were bored. But apparently, there are places where that's how the critiques go.

And, ok, so crits may ultimately be gnerally unhelpful. It depends on how you feel about them, i suppose. But they're definitely not going to be helpful if the teacher looks at whatever & says, "This is boring," because they may as well be saying, "I don't care." Well, sod the hell off, then. If you don't like it, say why in a constructive manner, not like a whiny two-year-old. Give suggestions that the artist can either take or leave. The author mentioned about going somewhere where the crits were usually held in front of students & faculty & they were harsh, & it was not uncommon for people to break down crying in front of everyone. Mr. Cook told us in ninth grade about a teacher he'd had who would look at the things up for critique, take down what he didn't like, & then talk about the remaining pieces, all the while literally stepping on those that he had taken down. I mean, come on, what the hell? What is that going to do?

Rambling... So i guess Carver did practice a little of what it preached. Who knew? :P

3 Comments
  • Mood: Tense
  • Listening to: Orinoco Flow-- Enya
  • Reading: Dracula-- Bram Stoker
  • Drinking: water

Devious Journal Entry

Journal Entry: Thu Jun 26, 2008, 9:43 PM
Ignore the mood. DA won't let me change it.

Plus, is anyone else having issues with moving around galleries? As in it won't let you go to the next page, or even the fifth, but just bounces back to the first? It keeps pulling this, & it's getting annoying. And, when i was trying to find something in my scraps, instead of going to the second page of those, it instead went to my main gallery.

So yeah. DA's having some issues right about now. FYI.

No Comments
  • Mood: Tense
  • Listening to: Werewolf-- Cat Power
  • Reading: Dracula-- Bram Stoker
  • Playing: a Dragon Knights RPG!! : DDDDD
  • Eating: cereal (feels stupid)
  • Drinking: water

Read this

Journal Entry: Thu Jun 19, 2008, 11:48 PM
Let's try this again: OK. Someone has effed up one of my comments. I saw it after i posted it; it was fine. Then, seeing it later, the content, including the sig, had changed. But the comment still had my username & icon, & it was still in its original spot. This has made me paranoid & worried that someone has hacked into something. Sent something to DA explaining what had happened. Also marked it as spam, despite the fact that it's still my username... My reaction was a kneejerk response, though childish.

Maybe i'm just paranoid or something, but just wanted to let some people know in the event that it happens again. Just in case anyone gets a weird comment from me; it's probably not really from me at all.

6 Comments
  • Mood: Tense
  • Listening to: May It Be-- FotR
  • Drinking: water

Brideshead: Revisited

Journal Entry: Wed Jun 18, 2008, 8:50 PM
Honestly, i wasn't really all that worried/ aggravated by the new movie off of Brideshead Revisited, but after reading the little bit of an article about it in the July issue of Elle magazine... i kind of had to beat the magazine against the wall. They're ruining it, & it especially irks me how they are sticking Julia everywhere. She's not supposed to be in Venice, or at Brideshead when Sebastian breaks/twists/does whatever to his ankle!

It sounds like they're just completely changing the ideas of the book-- especially when it comes to the religion aspect; Waugh will be turning in his grave-- & it gives the distinct impression that they have very little respect for those. Making Lady Marchmain out to be a monster-- i mean, i didn't really like her, but making her out to be some sort of monster just is wrong. "Poor Mummy" indeed.

And to cut out the whole whatever thing with Charles & Sebastian & just making Sebastian gay... To take out that relationship is just so stupid, & to just come out & decide to make Sebastian gay just takes away the ambiguity of his & Charles' relationship; it cheapens the story somehow, makes it more shallow. It aggravates me that it's just focusing on Charles & Julia's relationship because "Sebastian was the first." It makes me want to hate Julia, & i never really hated Julia. Not my favorite character, but i didn't hate her, & i don't like how drastically they're changing things, especially by making her this central thing, by having her everywhere, by making only her & Charles matter, instead of having both the relationships & keeping it as layered a story as it ought to be.

I mean, at least when PJ made LotR, even with drastic changes (Arwen at the Ford, Frodo showing the Ring (wtf), Frodo & Aragorn's characters being slightly uncanon (read: watered down & kind of wimpy at points)), one could tell there was still care & respect for the original story. But with this, it feels like they're taking Waugh's writing & twisting the story to their own ends, especially (once again) regarding the religion angle. Personally, i don't think Waugh's idea of religion comes across too well-- i think it's more a negative aspect in the book-- but it's wrong to just take a whole different spin on it. It's like they're trying to cater to their audience too much, by changing bits of the story to suit what the audience wants, as opposed to sitting them down & saying, "This is how things are in the story, so deal." I mean, is Cordelia even in there? Are they going to ruin her character, since she was so pious in the book?

It seems like the movie's deviating from the book about as much as Stardust, only this time without any author's blessing (because Gaiman & Vess didn't seem all that upset by the changes).

More rambling here. ; )

No Comments
  • Mood: Disbelief
  • Listening to: The Lady of Shalott-- Loreena McKennitt
  • Drinking: water
Previous Page    12345...    Next Page