An older picture I recently altered to make prints of for a pumpkin-themed event
See if you can guess which table is mine
(hint: it is the one with the lamest merchandise that the least number of people are looking it)
I sold nothing, but I sold nothing at higher prices than I had ever sold nothing at before. Partially at the urging of the venue owner, and partially because for all my stabs at integrity it means nothing once I can blame something that feels like a lapse on someone else. It also means I now must keep that price consistent or else the people I showed the high price to will get angry when they see something less than that. Or they would if any had paid it.
Anyway, in addition to some free iced tea they were nice enough to let me have the featured artist space for January, (though the decision came prior to my recent performance) and I will have pictures on walls inside the restaurant, which will not have interaction with me as a condition to owning one. The scenario also is feasible that somebody may buy a picture just to get it OFF the wall so that food may be consumed more peacefully. I am intrigued to discover how I will mess this up.
This was an improvement on my last event, where there were mystery boxes dumped directly in front of my table which visitors used for sitting on while facing away from me and eventually for standing facing toward when all the boxes were taken. I would rather fail because of what I did than have nobody know I did anything. When that happens my goal becomes to make people know what I did, and I might not consider that I did something pathetic. After this week I feel like I have taken another step toward my ultimate goal of giving up. After all these months of distractions and setbacks it is nice to be making progress again.
Additionally, you may have become aware of the three for the moment unsightly link “buttons” now at the top of the main bimshwel page. If you had not then now you have, in a sense. One attempts to connect to whatever this is.
In the past i have given out “business” cards to people at events like these, but nothing ever comes of it because if anyone entered the website URL mentioned on the card, instead of art details they would see instead endless rambling about supermarkets and dumb things people do on the internet (such as write about it). Now they can find pictures, if they wait a few seconds for those awful “buttons” to load, and then they can see the pictures and think “yep, that’s the stuff I didn’t buy prints of today sold by that awkward weirdo who kept saying ‘hello’ out of forced habit but had no natural social inclinations beyond that. Gosh that was upsetting. Why did I take this card?”
I intend to make the awful buttons less awful, but I also intend to go running once in a while and eat pizza less often.
Ideally, the gallery’s rather default-looking setup is only temporary. Even so, it is rather nice for something free, I think. And unlike other free galleries, when something does not work it is not done deliberately as a ruse to try and sell me non-free version. It might be unethical for me to use something free as a means to make a profit, but I have not actually considered any way to use this for that purpose. I imagine I could send art-work through the mail. My imagination usually gets me into trouble.
Here is what my ridiculous imps would look like if I had business sense. More gimmicky, impossible to tell who drew them, and seemingly ripped off of other commercial properties. Is this an official spinoff of trolls or little ponies or care bears or an unrelated venture trying to chase the same buckwagon? People only relate to things that I do not relate to. They want to buy things that remind them of other things they have been ordered to buy. I would never buy one, and thus I am ill-equipped to make something that a buyer of these would buy.
Of course this display was gone the next time I came into the store and I have never encountered the name “zelfs” since nor had I prior to then (and I must be clear that I do not desire to), but that can also be desirable. If your soulless, derivative, cynical grab at money fails, you want everyone to have forgotten it by the time you make your next attempt at reminding people of stuff that worked. You might notice that is the opposite of my personal feeling, where I prefer to be remembered and to not remind anyone of anyone else. If I saw something that reminded me of me and it made money I would get mad, because then I would need to change me to seem like I wasn’t copying me.
It is common, on the art websites I use, for a participant to become infuriated at “art theft,” in which somebody tries to sell another person’s pictures and collect money for it. I don’t even matter enough for anyone to bother. I would probably doubt that if I heard it happened. If it was TRUE and it worked I would consider trying to take the perpetrator on as a business partner (an unbiased observer might advise that person to turn me down). The closest I came to “art theft” was when I taped a huge pencil drawing to a wall beside a door at the university while I went to retrieve some other things, and it fell off, and somebody picked it up and walked off with it because it looked like abandoned garbage rather than a legitimate finished project that the artist was trying to take home. When the person was persuaded by police intervention to give it back I almost felt bad. I felt like I had ruined several people’s days (not including mine). I wanted to thank the unidentified taker for wanting it. The party which I retrieved it from offered no comment on the quality. I might have let the person keep it but I had not scanned it yet and I needed to bring it back at the end of the semester for a grade anyhow (rubbish generally gets a better grade than nothing at all). Currently it is on a shelf smaller than itself behind me with other things stacked on it and probably no longer in displayable or theftworthy condition.
You might have noticed some strange rubbish going on above here. Somehow merely explaining that proved too great a task for me to do in a week-end, so I will try again on Monday.
———————————————
Ah-ha I see. I don’t just draw over the pictures from before because if I put them in different places or change the dialog, things are not guaranteed to fit properly. Also, in those mold days, when the lizard creature wore a coat, I drew the coat first without planning a body beneath it, and this lead to implausible proportions, sometimes almost monstrous when I didn’t draw the feet. Adding feet made the creature inexplicably small. Neither form consistently had legs. Clothing that forms its own body can be used to good effect, but I was not doing that. The stupid car was worse, and is still awful. It will always be awful. You could even make the case that it looks worse than it formerly did. I like the colors, at the least.
By this point I have removed most of the dialogue that I thought was awkward and the “story” fragments that did not make sense. Now the task is to find a place where this can link with the existing pages, though some of them need to be enlarged or have their text made more readable. But at least nobody is going to abruptly give up because the pictures were grainy uncolored pencil drawings (after one more of these). Though someone willing to put up with that because they found the material engaging in some way despite being ugly is probably someone I should be glad to have around.
I hope i am not expanding Treco’s part too much and wasting responses and actions that would be better used for subsequent “encounters.” There is probably a limited amount of things that arms stuck to a chair can do and still seem interesting.
I have become aware that the last row’s lines are less conspicuous than on the rows before it. There is a perfectly good explanation for that.
page 17 of this. This will be known far and why as the only comic strip drawn entirely in microsoft bob.
I keep forgetting that I can simply draw over the pictures from before and use most of the same dialog. I don’t need to redraw and rewrite everything.
when I went to redraw this one, I eventually remembered that the additional device enters a code to start the car. Since the car has already been started it is unnecessary. But I liked the visual clutter, and perhaps I should have drawn it anyway and not thought what it was doing.
I had the car start earlier so that I could show it entering the detour, because otherwise it does not need to go anywhere. Me from 12/8 years ago is a very strange writing partner.
I tried using my quacom tablet to redraw my layout rather than the “usual” way, which is to use the mouse for that. Since I did this in an attempt to be faster, you can be certain that it took longer.
When I reviewed these, I discovered that I formerly drew the lizard’s nose as less bulbous and schnozly, and eyes in general as smaller and less focused toward the center, as I was in a phase when I thought I should make things harder for me. I like the look which resulted, even if it does not suit the awkward personality. I don’t know why this solution did not occur to me sooner. It might not make sense that clothing could alter a being’s physical structure, but many things do not. This did occur in 1994’s The Shadow but I just presumed it was really bad editing around stunt scenes. That’s the way we do it in America; everything’s fake.
At one point I had intended to have the lizard, whose original font was the redundantly named Pixiefont, speak in a coincidentally similar but slightly creepier-looking font called Gorey while wearing the hat, but I stopped using fonts between it jumping out a window and the next time it spoke, so that did not occur. And maybe it is best to keep visual signals to a minimum, so the viewer would have to decide how much influence the questionable head-adornment is giving at any point. However, for now it is supposed to be obvious.
I will answer the writer Mark Joseph Stern’s question with a parable.
At least once all up in a time, the Slate magazine website posted a substanceless, speculation-filled article with a loaded headline in an attempt to build controversy, make a few dumb people think they are smart, a few other dumb people really angry and overall waste everybody’s time. I decided it was silly. The end [7 paragraphs later].
No, gay people are not smarter than straight people, and straight people are not smarter than gay people, and anybody who gives in to this sort of thinking, wondering if one should win or one can win is an idiot, gay or otherwise.
The full, post-lure title includes “or do they just work harder?” but that is even worse, in a sense, because it implies one of those options MUST be true.
Is it not enough to have “men vs women” a core component of pointless, unwinnable, non-debate? Why can’t we treat this like racial questions? This same writer would be asking “are asians smarter than whites?” if that wasn’t likely to get him fired, and if it wasn’t it wouldn’t be a new question. So why doesn’t this get anyone fired? We know people are different. Generalizing about intelligence never gets us anywhere. Most people consider intelligence a fundamental aspect of their being. Attempting to rank huge segments of the population by this basic yet hard to quantify attribute has never been good for humanity and isn’t likely to start.
There are not but two sides to the world. straight v bent is like democrats v republicans. It divides people needlessly while also insisting that it is sufficient to pick one imperfect thing over one other imperfect thing and that this is in everybody’s best interest. It encourages us to argue passionately about GARBAGE. Look even I am doing it.
complacency about one’s intelligence is one of the dumbest behaviors I encounter, and it’s about even between gay and straight people. An article like this will only increase that behavior in either of them.
It may be possible for “straight” types to go longer in life without having their fundamental beliefs or feelings questioned, which may make them more inclined to be stubborn on everything and never consider other possibilities. Increasingly, however, gay people are taught to believe there is nothing out of the ordinary about their preference (thus holding up the concept that ordinary is something to strive for) and they are RIGHT and should be PROUD and so become inclined to be just as insufferably set in their ways, and just as inclined to track down rubbish like this article to use as “proof” of their own superiority as the opposing side, which ideally wouldn’t be opposing them at all.
And anyway there are other ways to be misunderstood or disliked than what sort of person you make sex on. I don’t do it to anybody and that’s not the biggest thing that keeps me from relating to them.
People are bullied and tortured for being or seeming homosexual. I am not saying that is good. I just think pride is excessive. Criticism is not persecution.
On a similar note, my previous blowing up about Nazi symbolism should not imply I am one of those ultimate “friend of Israel” types. We shouldn’t be afraid to point out when the Israeli government does something cruel or foolish. It DOES and it gets away with that because it is proud and can easily equate criticism with persecution.
Mr. Joseph Stern determined who was smartest by what category of people were getting genius grants. This one time, even though gay people have existed for longer than a year. I saw a few years ago another article about the smartest cities in the country and determined the winner by counting libraries and museums. You can’t determine overall intelligence quantity by such limited categories. I question if we really can at all.
A direct quote from today’s article:
It shouldn’t! That is centuries, millenia-old self-justifying nobility dogma whose only result is that they vote themselves higher salaries and lower taxes. That’s how we get manifest destiny and slavery and all that manner of horror. The fact that more multimillionaires are openly gay than previously doesn’t make them all grand and noble now. I realize this as slippery a slope argument as “what’s next? letting people marry animals?” but this has historical precedent. I do not think slavery of non-gays is likely or feasible, but it starts like this. When you declare one group less smart than another group you declare them less worthy of decency.
I denigrate intelligence too often, but I avoid declaring a “smarter” group. I also avoid putting faith in group that has proclaimed itself worthy to declare a smart group. The sad fact is that a declaration of superior intelligence often arises over evaluation of a subjective matter, often in artistic fields. I don’t believe any of us is smart enough to know who is really smartest, and we only hurt ourselves as a species when we convince ourselves that we are.
I do not say “nobody is smart.” I say trying to label everyone accomplishes nothing good, and I have said it for years. If I do it, it is for amusement purposes and should not be mistaken for serious journalism, and I will never pretend I know who is the most superior.
This reminds me that deviantart, the ostensibly free visual art website, recently fulfilled my prophecy and gave paying members huge stars next to their names. Fortunately, and for the first time of those when I paid attention, more people are protesting the garbage change than supporting it, but not without some priveleged bootstrap class elitism slipping in.
Criticism isn’t just persecution, it’s an act of treason. Observe how it doesn’t matter if these two are homosexual.
And without switching websites:
I won’t point fingers but I have a theory that one of these openly male artists is gay and the other one isn’t, but I think they actually have a lot in common. They both blame someone else, for one thing.
Back to my “point,” plenty of idiots go to college. And plenty of idiots are inclined to imagine they are smart BECAUSE they go to college. They could be exceptions, but that would still call the criteria into question, and assist in calling the question into question. By this definition of intelligence it really doesn’t matter who is smarter. You could ask “are gays better at adhering to arbitrary constructs of society than straight people?” And you wouldn’t because straight people built them.
Another quote:
And you just might have NOTHING and be tossing out speculations about things that are impossible to verify so you fill more space.
The article concludes with the author ADMITTING that there’s nothing:
but never considers that his criteria is garbage. Nor that there is any alternative to being a “genius” than being “dumb.” “Intelligence” determines many things and is not a single value that can be conclusively measured. He also does not appear to consider that there might be any alternative to being hetero than homo sexual.
we can probably say that whoever bought this magazine to gain home access to the “who’s gay” list is probably a moron. And still I can imagine a remote exception in which that would not be the case.
I saw these both the same day and wasn’t even taking a picture of this one, an issue of Globe. I think I was aiming at an US weekly for some reason. I only noticed it now when I was trying to find my picture of the Examiner cover. Maybe we can talk about “smart” when we stop caring who is gay.
And yet I think we have come a long way even since I have been on the internet.
Nobody even wonders if Pokemon are gay anymore.
You know what, forget it. I would like to wash my hands of this matter, but I am currently at an important business meal engagement. What-ever shall I do?
Boh fiddlesticks.
Next time I will wear my dinner [fingerless] gloves.
page 58 of that
Another one that was extremely hard to draw for no clear reason. Even with some minor objects blatantly left undetailed or undrawn in certain frames. I did draw in the missing feet from the previous page. Gallimimus is still misspelled.
I admit this page accomplishes absolutely nothing. Not directly, anyway. I decided it was better to stretch this incident to fill the whole page than try to cut into something else with two frame-spaces left. i have decided I want to keep things even so that I can move them around more easily if the need ever arises. I think out of order but do not understand a picture until I have drawn it, which makes “planning ahead” a very alien concept. there is probably some fundamental rule of cartooning written by somebody I should have heard of that ways “never spend 12 frames on a total diversion”
And then of course I thought of something else after stretching it so now everything is tightly crammed in. I meant to stop forcing things onto pages that could not hold them. truly i did. or dispense with the concept of “pages” when they were not necessary. That is not going well! In fact it is not going at all.
I had to change this drawing to get the right effect, but that is one of the most punchable elpses I recollect encountering.
“one of,” I said.
Sad elpse in a circle reminds me of the drawing of a meeply round-eared animal that accompanied the word “cub” in my old phonics books. I recall I used to draw swords stabbing into it and helicopters shooting bullets at it right there on the page. I do not recall a teacher ever asking me why I did this or acknowledging the questionable behaviour in any way. They really didn’t pay much attention to individual students, usually. One time I joined two lowercase Ts on a word like “butter” and had the word marked as incorrect because (and I had to bring up the issue myself afterward) the teacher thought I spelled it with one H in it. A capital H in the middle of the word “butter” with lines poking out the left and right where there should have been two Ts which make a completely different sound than H. What that we’ve been through together makes you think I am capable of such a ludicrous error? I hope that’s not the REAL reason I was sent to special education. “Who would think a capital H goes there? After all the phonics we’ve been through? Get that kid outta here!” Dumb old elpse. It is elpse’s fault that I was forced into a series of environments within which I would become so disordered through the years that I eventually thought elpse was a good idea to come up with.
Seeing that life in magazine form last week reminded me that Jack Nicholson was in the 1989 Batman movie, and how surprised I was when I finally watched it, roundabout 2009 and found it just about as silly as the Joel Shoemaker Batman films it was supposed to be powers greater than. I was expecting a dark, edgy Batman but it was preposterous. I thought the sequel, 1992’s Batman Returns would have to be better, due to lacking The Joker and any totally inappropriate Prince songs, but I forgot that Danny Devito was in it and Michael Keaton again.
This is a good role for Danny Devito, but not a good role for a film that thinks it is anything apart from ludicrous. I only got to seeing it a few months before now. I do things at my own pace! It isn’t such a big deal that 12 years passed between when I started college and received a bachelor degree when it took me almost twice as long to watch two Batman films. And even considering that tastes change in such a period, it was hard for me to take, especially after encountering for much of that length the notion of how badly the subsequent films made a solid and noble franchise abruptly laughable.
It is “dark” in the respect that people get shot and fall out of buildings, but it is still a smirking hokefest that makes the title character look more clownish than his adversaries (many of whom are actual clowns). Bruce Wayne comes across like a total goof with his weird haircut, christmas sweaters and Glenn Beck glasses.
Do I just have the wrong expectations? The better Batman comics support a view that Batman is “real” with Bruce Wayne a persona maintained to preserve secrecy and financing for Batman’s operations, so if it serves his purposes to have Bruce be a dork he will do it. But here he is dorking it up as Bruce Wayne in the Batcave. BRUCE WAYNE IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE BATCAVE!
Clearly sweaters are important to Bruce Wayne, since he sometimes buys extra airplane seats for them, but he does not wear them unless urgent circumstances require it, and never in the Batcave!
This film just treats him like Clark Kent without magic powers, though, so in this context I am supposed to believe that this is how somebody who becomes Batman wants to be perceived. If possible he would quit being Batman and have his butler bring him hot chocolate all day. A more convincing Batman wouldn’t know what to do with himself if the crime ran out. I relate to that Batman because nobody can really relate to him.
Not only is Christopher Walken, who is absurd, prominently in the film, there is another person in it doing an impression of Walken, and both are less ridiculous than the main characters DESPITE wearing bowties.
I especially disliked the ruse through which Bruce Wayne puts Penguin back into public disfavor amidst his promising mayoral campaign. Penguin is giving a speech, and then Bruce jams up in the frequency of the speech. I know this because there are several scenes of him jamming frequencies while Alfred wears ridiculous headphones and gives “OK!!!” gestures and a television monitor shows the message “JAMMING FREQUENCY.” This causes, to emit from the Penguin’s loudspeakers, some audio Batman had recorded earlier of the Penguin saying something like “ha ha, got em!” and then Wayne loops it endlessly, which proves the Penguin means it, because he said it so many times.
The actual line is “You gotta admit, I played this stinkin’ city like a harp from hyellll!” which is a peculiar phrase and I had to hear it about 20 times to figure out what it was. The audience only hears it about 15 times but recognize it immediately. “NOBODY plays Gotham city like a harp from hell by golly ohare! ESPECIALLY not after calling it stinkin’!”
Even though it is weird and bruce wayne is doing some mix dj scratch thing to it that should make it obvious as an altered voice, even though he CAN’T do that because he is playing a compact disc and not a vinyl record, which means the sound data is stored digitally and not in a linear analog fashion, but Tim Burton just thought “CDs, those are like high-tech records, right? Those sound like things Batman would have” without considering that they operate differently, even though it should be obvious because there is no needle. I would accept this from the Adam West Bat-Man series, but nobody had CDs then so the situation did not arise.
So this one bit of audio out of context, that clearly is not being spoken by the speaker or any non-robot and that doesn’t follow from the speech he had been giving at all is instantly taken as full, inarguable proof of Penguin’s full corruption by every person in the city who likes him even though there only appear to be about fifty attending his speech, which suggests he had no hope of being elected anyway. None of those people wonder “where is this looped bit of inexpertly remixed audio coming from? Should we so quickly doubt this man we came from so far to trust?”
Penguin makes no effort to explain it, despite his gift for schemes and misleading people and having already established that people are prejudiced against him, and the audience begins literally speaking some very enunciated “boo!”s accompanied by Tony the Tiger gestures, followed by tossing obscene amounts of produce, which Penguin identifies as “eggs and tomaytas” on camera as lettuce and tomatoes strike his umbrella.
They generate it out of their hands like they are monsters from video games. This whole scene could have been presented absurdly, to show that the people of Gotham City are fickle and treat politics like a vaudeville show, but it is presented as if it is plausible.
I don’t think there is a way to do that plausibly!
I hate hate hate that plot contrivance. I hated it in UHF der film and that one episode of the simpsons, although those two were even less plausible. In both of them some rich guy boasted about how he tricked people, and a clever protagonist started filming it and this was instantly broadcast on every television box in the world without a batcave full of computers to jam with frequencies or interrupt current programming. You turn on the camera and everybody everywhere sees it and despite how weird that is, they trust it.
It must be acknowledged that this is normally one of Joker’s schemes. He is constantly taking over every broadcast outlet at once and threatening people, and it’s never explained how, in the context of this world that is supposed to be so gritty and hard-realistic. TV is just MAGIC.
After all that, as I said, Penguin pulls out his umbrella to defend against the killer eggs and then opens fire on the crowd. Fortunately they all have military training and instantly drop to foxhole position and none are killed. Still, as the only person in town who knows Penguin’s umbrella is made out of a machine-gun, Batman should have been THERE and beating Penguin up in front of people instead of pulling tricks out of Bosko cartoons. The REASON for the roundabout method is that the public adores the Penguin for reasons demonstrated as expertly and convincingly as anything else in the film and Batman cannot beat him up without exposing him as a fraud first. Except Batman CAN do that because Batman is unconcerned with public opinion when there is a risk of potential parents being shot. It works in Batman’s favor when criminals think he is NOT working with the police. Since this is Batman versus the Penguin and not Flagstroop McGrit versus Arab-looking Fellow there isn’t any risk of the “SEE? Unlawful detention and torture saves LIVES” subtext that our present biased left-wing media loves so much.
Also consider that Wayne jams not the broadcast television signal, but the connection from Penguin’s microphone to the local amplification system, because the people in that crowd there hear the edit. That means Wayne had to go all the way to city hall, mess with the wires on those specific microphones, then go all the way back to the Batcave to engineer his giggle symphony.
the actual “fight” between batman and penguin lasts about 7 seconds, and then penguin’s hideout explodes for 20 minutes. All in all a film that exists.
All this is not to say that Batman Forever is superior or as good or any good –I have not viewed it in its entirety since its initial release and recall nothing of substance about it–, merely that its descent into hokeyness is consistent and picks up where Tim Burton left off. Let us be rid of the fantasy that Tim Burton directed great and sensible Batman Films. When people say Batman Returns is “dark,” that just means there is blood in it, and possibly worse lighting. That does not have any bearing on how stupid it isn’t. Batman Forever is the “less dark” and it still finds an opportunity to present the mentally disabled as hilarious morons wearing 1930s straight jackets. (Disregarding this time that the name “asylum” suggests the residents should have some safety there, since Arkham Asylum is accepted to primarily house unrepentant murderers). It may not be reasonable to expect anything more mature than that from a film series about a man who dresses like a bat to combat people who dress like other animals.
People that I have met in person claim the ABC saturday morning sonic hedgehog cartoon is “darker” than a contemporary syndicated cartoon series that was consciously ridiculous. Alright, but it’s still abundantly embarrassing, and without being able to blame anything on Japanese weirdness.
My favorite scene that I recall shows 2-Face at The Circus, where he threatens to [something] if Batman did not reveal himself. Of course Bruce Wayne IS at The Circus, so he stands up and starts yelling out “I’m Batman!” over and over again but nobody hears him doing that. I tried to find that scene in your tube but all I found were dorks who video-recorded their heads emitting the exact same reviews this movie got when it came out 18 bloody years ago, plus a staggering amount of gorbos playing, and usually not especially well, the innumerable worse ports of the already terrible Super Nintendo game vaguely based on the film. If people will watch THAT then they don’t need to be complaining about the less bad thing that is based on.
First of all that is not an argument, and not my fault anyhow! I think the case could be made that if Batman Forever had not have been produced, Batman Returns could never have been favorably compared against it, and people would see it for what it is and be less inclined to
That is enough for today.
Hello, Jack Nicholson is dead, according to context clues given off by this ironically named publication. I wonder if his unnaturally street caricature-like swollen head was a factor in his demise. Maybe an airplane crashed into it or a triceratops hatched out of it.
Additionally, I am so off my contemporary culture that I had to check first to make sure Jack Nicholson was not dead before posting this.
Another large-headed matter I had valid reason to check up on recently:
Tommy Lasorda, best known for his endorsement of the perennial Toys R Us video game-cover pegboard space-filler Bill Clinton Baseball on the Sega Genesis now looks like
the president who succeeded Clinton, Dick Cheney.
Also, when I was in Colorado (a geographical region to the west of where I presently reside), every man over a certain age looked like Dick Cheney. I believe one of them overheard me remark on this, and while he appeared to frown in my direction, he did not have me executed because he does not have enough shame to realize that me comparing him to himself is meant to be derogatory.
That is an odd way to end, so here instead is a corny guy listening to corn.
He looks like the protagonist from another Sega Genesis release, Flashback. I am also reminded of the time I loaned my flash to somebody, for at some point I needed to get my flash back. Additionally, public nudity enthusiasts never expect you to flash back.
I will call him Cornrad.
However, corn is not rad (though it may be radioactive).
TMI Tuesday
page 57 of this.
imagine I generate this for ten more years. Will something happen or will it just be a matter of getting from one unpleasant service interaction to another? How long can i show nemitz being annoyed at elpse being annoyed at lope before it becomes implausible for them to be together?
Unfortunately elpse is only too plausible to me. I constantly resent people who really have no hope of ever not annoying me. people like me who really should not. Elpse does not represent me nor does the lizard represent anyone else, though. They are only their own brightly colored punchable selves.
“close-up” frames save a bit of time but I keep feeling like i am missing opportunities to show background silliness that are best to do in frames where nothing is happening in the foreground – the reason it is possible to be close up.
The last few pages I used no real ink on because that took a long time. Not to do, just to think about, because I am so terrified of mistakes, and then the backgrounds always held me up, whereas if I only used computer lines I could figure the setting out as I went along. But I bought a huge bottle of ink about two years ago, during a period when I was inexplicably confident in my ability to use it, when I also had no time to use it, that I now need to justify the purchase of. I felt like the characters looked more interesting with the real ink, also. Do they? Assuming you have been following along, you probably didn’t even notice that I had stopped! (unless I said so, but that would also mean you read my accompanying dull ramblement) Still, in an attempt to sort all that out, I this time put ink over just the characters and stopped once it started to get annoying, and imagined I would erase the pencil lines underneath just that ink and fill in less important matters later. So it happened that at the scan phase this nemitz was just a head and an indistinct, not-quite matched torso, and it looked like a barely mobile, segment-operated boss foe from a super nintendo game. That took longer to say than it was worth.
I refrain from commenting on the justifiability of this.
Hey, let me tell you something. I do not NEED your permission to tell you anything!
========================================
A few bims ago I got into the topic of people pretending to be Nazis on the internet.
You might be aware that I have had my own accusations of insensitivity with regard to Hitlery activities, and I have considered the potential hypocrisy of me whining over this. But I didn’t say so then so I say it now. My use of nazy imagery behind generalissimo eli was meant to be seen as conspicuously bad taste, and if I thought that could not be determined from the context I would have changed it so that it was. These people think it is GOOD taste.
When I was in fourth grade I remember seeing another student draw a big swastika in a notebook. Nobody had ever told me that the Nazis butchered citizens of their own country, but I recognized the symbol from a book in my house and from a bizarre “ducktators” cartoon i had at one point on a vhs tape (that like any other cartoon I watched just because it was a cartoon without considering what its point was) and just thought “hey that IS a neat symbol. I will draw it in MY notebook too!” So after every suit-wearing man in the school district decided I was safe to return to the class, I naturally recited a jerky poem about how I can like whatever I want and nobody has the power to stop me.
This notice about returning was posted on the page of the person in question shortly before she was barred from returning to this specific fur-themed website. Actual Nazis’ lack of belief in free expression is one of the major things that defines them as nazis, but this has nothing to do with “free speech.” You can’t (or shouldn’t be) arrested for stating opinions, but you have no constitutionally granted right to use any website. And if we disregard the law, because it is often needlessly harsh and arbitrary, plus generally not written with the internet in mind, and consider what would be the “nice” or morally just thing to do, this person probably should have been tossed in a dumpster four years earlier. I would feel that way if I encountered this without any backstory.
“Free speech” is meant to give you also the opportunity to defend your opinion. Legally you do not have to, but if you merely state it and claim you are entitled to it, then it comes across like you CAN’T defend it, especially if you have plenty of time to write poems and draw pointless animations whose only purpose is, once again, to bother people. The supreme court might support your right to use the swastika to annoy people, but they might also agree that Richard Garriott can come sleep in my bed any time he wants because the end user license agreement for the Ultima Collection CD I got 14 years ago says so. Nobody reasonable would accept that.
As far as what these opinions are, “cartoon cats should proudly wear world war 2 nazi swastika armbands” is an opinion, in a sense, I suppose, and it isn’t just furries who are going to not like that.
This is controversial or contentious like putting a pancreas in someone’s mailbox is controversial: it isn’t, it’s just illogical and can’t possibly accomplish anything. No publicity is bad publicity, right? But this is because less than 15 people will ever read this. Nobody will give the crispy cat a book deal because I linked to its page.
I have made jokes about the famous September 11 2001, because the hype and the federally, commercially mandated mourning was an artificial and unpleasant, and often laughable waste of time. But I never made it a major life goal to post things on the internet designed foremost to be a nuisance. And still I felt bad about some of it, eventually. You can’t even compare nazi stuff to other symbols; 70 years of remembering history to avoid repeating it have removed it from logical consideration.
There could be a time in United America and Germany when swastikas mean good luck and good times, but nazis themselves wearing swastikas will always be genocidal murderers, and that stuff isn’t only in these two countries or the past. There are active Nazi groups in Russia. There are a few in the parliament of Greece, and not in the “Heil Obama, he wants to use the power the constitution grants him” sense; people who would kill their own citizens out in the open, without even sending them to secret prisons first, if they got enough of their own in the room for a vote. A legitimate attempt to desensitize people to this solves nothing.
The acquaintance I mentioned last time also draws the characters without swastikas, because he found the response to his first picture, which fully featured them, lacking, but he still credits the characters to this crispy person who is deliberately horrid, and then tries to promote the horrid person to someone like me (or did, one single time). I won’t give a gummy bear to somebody whose existence I can’t justify (not even a clear one; I actually like them now); I certainly wouldn’t spend hours drawing pictures for them, especially if I had to deliberately mischaracterize the subjects. The characters aren’t particularly distinctive anyway. You could draw any dumb white cartoon cat and call it an “original character” and avoid associating with creeps like that. It would still be a boring style pastiche but I suppose that is beside the present point. In fact as far as I can tell nobody but me cares whose characters he is drawing so long as he takes out the swastikas, even though if they are the same characters they are still nazis, because part of being a furry is being able to look at a dumb cartoon like Balto or Rescuers Down Under or something drawn to resemble one and not realize how dumb it is, and that’s why they enjoy each other’s company and I don’t.
Apart from trying to conclude an unfinished thought, I also couldn’t handle bimshwel being the last “video game humor” website to not have the condemnatory, excema suffering Master-D on it. I cannot do anything about its ultimate fate as the last website.
Speaking of cruel, power-mad dictators with low opinions of Anne Frank,
I cannot tell you what manner of female human Justin Beepler desires (It might affect listeners’ abilities to imagine they specifically are being sung at if they had details, after eh).
However, our own Never-Seen (not even now; I refuse to look) bimshwel exclusive photographs show that purple hair and knee-high yellow boots do not tickle his fancy. Walking barefoot on one’s toes while wearing blue capri pants is the only way to go.
Apart from specifically choosing to look like an extra from West Side Story, the recording industry’s current Justin’s transition from a welch’s grape juice advertisement-look is nothing new. It is the standard “hey Media I have SEX now watch out” forced image makeover. Usually people try to become trashy or thuggish, unless they already have a thug image, in which event they elect to remain thug-like. Nobody ever thinks “maybe I should change my public image of sex-driven, overpaid, selfish, untrustworthy moron.” In fact that is often a condition for them to continue being granted the luxury of being one (unless they become nazis or mildly overweight). What is notable is that this is the fourth time I have mentioned he-who-biebs despite only ever having heard one of his songs and only learned it was his on a technicality. This could give people the impression that I sometimes have really elaborate opinions on topics I know nothing about.
page 56 of the bimshwellian comicoid. due to unusual logistical matters i started drawing this one before i had colored the previous. In fract both were drawn before I went to Paris; my hope was to work on them while there and like most of my hope for the trip it was invalid.
How did the fringo club get back to its starting place in half a page when their outward journey took 2 pages? Simple: I drew that it happened.
I might be overdoing the “perspective” forcing, especially since there are only three things in this comic that I know how to draw: imps, geometric shapes and vegetables. Implying that I can do more than that makes it more obvious that I cannot.
i removed the coat from nemitz because I kept forgetting to draw it, and then having to erase fur-edged arms. The same with the hat, which I retroactively declared had fallen off by its own power on the previous page to keep me from having to re-evaluate what mits horns were doing.
I realized rather late that I don’t know what “money” looks like. I drew it as paper first (hence dumb mitz lunging for it (with that opportunity removed it now seems probable that nemitz ate its hat and coat)) but when coloring it like monopoly money decided there was no reason that it should be paper, except to make it instantly recognizable as money when it is displayed. next I drew it as gummy bear-like objects but they seemed too small. I settled on little balls of fuzz when I thought of it and laughed at the idea. I had the elpse creature say “monsy” instead of “well” in that frame since that was now no longer evident from the image. I may have to change them to bigger balls of fuzz if they still seem awkward when I review the frame for attachment to the next page, which has not been drawn yet.
There was a time when writing became an overwhelming burden, because I made the job too difficult, and I resorted to posting pictures I made in the absence of long written pieces, and then later I realized that, owning the website, I was entitled to do that, and later still I felt bad about it again and posted neither words nor pictures. Those were some tough times.
You should always bring a hat to protect against burns.
I think this fulfills my blue sky quota for the year.
Feel free to use this as the title screen to your terrible 1992 super vga shareware game.
a “bear” because the original sketch 9 or so years ago had a similar looking creature in it. I could change it but I have not thought lately. What I did change was the potential victim to ant, instead of a rat. I thought the rat was more stylish but was of improbable size and presumed quickness to suit this pasttime. And then I drew the replacement ant at the size of a rat because I was still hurting from my loss. I wish somebody who otherwise had no sympathy for humanity would take pity on me.
And I suppose you could say ah ha! Obviously nazis dislike gays so this is a JOKE. Like
Fortunately that mental acrobatics isn’t necessary because, like this one who has reported on a previous posting by me of the previous image, there actually are people who think adopting Third Reich names and symbolism is stylish and acceptable [for their otherwise stylish and acceptable misanthropic animal personas], which requires totally different but more publicized mental acrobatics to comprehend. Either they have no concept what real National Socialists actually were, and willingly keep themselves from knowing, making them morons, or know full well and have no problem with it, and I don’t understand how somebody raised in this country in this time period can get to that position.
In fact I have been more closely acquainted with at least one person who thinks neo-nazi-ism isn’t a big deal so long as the culprit draws cute kitty-cats.
And I probably don’t help it by changing the subject away from condoning Nazis,
because I was concerned I was being too hard on my conversation opponent because I knew I was annoyed at him already, for other reasons, such as liking other artists I had different problems with. But thinking now (glad I thought of it), I shouldn’t silence myself to preserve a relationship where I must constantly silence myself, for it is always the same reason: these people don’t care/notice how horrid or infantile anyone else is so long as the cute distribution operation is maintained. The fur-folk crum-bummunity thrives on that, but it is symptomatic of society in general. We treat babies like royalty (because they are “cute” to someone) and if they have a marketable talent then they may get to grow up feeling entitled to special treatment. Noisy, abrasive, uncontrollable, but they draw/sing/wear/remove clothing nice so they get away with it. People who are aware it is horrible say nothing because they can make money for themselves by filming and producing television programs about it. The fantasy of entitlement is “reality.” This “cute” nazi fan artist has nearly 1900 known regular observers, a majority of whom may be presumed to condone the whole thing. There’s no incentive there to alter the behavior. There are 14-year-olds who aren’t necessarily nazis but have 3 times the following and it’s just normal to them that whatever awful they thing they do, if even 3% publicly support them or think they stand to gain something by seeming to, there will be 90ish people to say “great job living!” If I said “that person is a Nazi!” in any other context I would look like a hyperbolic kook, and now that I can say that, the response is “I know, isn’t it cute?”
Anyway, the point is that sometimes it is better if people like me just post drawings without saying anything.
All this is not to say there aren’t individuals who deserve the gas chamber, but that needs to be decided on a case by case basis.
The topic continues over here.
My layouts are typically boring. they should probably stay boring. I observed a bunch of batman comics with very “dynamic” layouts and individual pages were often impossible to see immediate logic in. I found out who won the fight when there was a pile of bodies on the ground or batman on the ground. Outside of fights it was mostly narration. Why don’t I just read a real book, then? Because that would take longer than 15 minutes.
I put too many gnomes into Fringo’s gang. For the chase portion, instead of looking at who I had already drawn inside the bar, I just made new gnomes. and yet i had difficulty deciding who was holding the weapons (my layout from months ago just showed hands) and feared I might have to draw up a new one or bring another out of the bar, which I did not want to do because there are already too many there. I didn’t want to have one of the wimpy gnomes holding the key, since it’s a BIG key. the satyr seemed a good choice, since they love their secrets, but since that one expressed dissent I don’t think it would brandish the item so quickly. also I am sure somebody would appear to tell me that satyrs are associated with drunkenness and I would be a fool to pass an opportunity to incorporate something-to-do with liquor. maybe a shot gun that fires shot glasses or something stupid like that. stupid is the goal.
I spent an hour looking up names of famous goats, frogs, cows and whatever but couldn’t come up with anything I liked better than “lamb chop” that also seemed like Fringo would say it. “mold-covered hamburger” didn’t quite fit the emotional context or the space and “puke minotaur” also didn’t fit the space. The space was set initially with “moldovan.” “Capricorn” didn’t seem insulting but “crapicorn” seemed out of character. I like “sagittarius” but then it just looks like I messed up and if I were lacking for true errors then I could get through the text portion of these updates much faster.
I did not know how to draw bicycles before this section, and as it has progressed I somehow got worse at it than when I started. Hopefully I will never have to draw them again but unfortunately I like the gnomes. Maybe they can get a van to travel in.
If I start describing myself as “creator of comic BIMSHWEL” will it trick people into thinking I am legitimate, and therefore gain the attention of people who demand advance guarantee of legitimacy? I do not need to disclose that it is not a job anyone else was vying for.
I was in France. Now I am not. It is rather difficult to sum up in a way that would be entertaining or relevant to bimshwel, and certainly not both. Here then is something that I wrote before I left.
Fish with sunglasses or a mustache. I suppose this isn’t something I “wrote” so much as “deemed adequately strange as to be consistent with past site content.”
this is a real movie? I would have thought that was a lonely island sketch but the corny white guy isn’t wearing sunglasses.
We bought a ZOO y’all! We’ve got ANIMALS and stuff! We’re acting really HARD CORE about RANDOM MUNDANE THINGS and this will NEVER GET OLD!
I’m a BIMSHWEL entry y’all! I’m really BITTER about my lack of gimmicky popularity so I find REASONS to complain about anyone who HAS it!
and donald duck is officially as classy as a beer advertisement.
Hence the proud strut in this related scene, I suppose. In fact only one of them seems at all uncomfortable about appearing here…
But I guess he got over it because he seems to have tossed off his clothes and is presumably running around naked somewhere near.
Oh that’s “cafe mickey,” apparently, at the free entry section of Parcs Disneyland where I met Titash from the internet. I didn’t actually eat in that place or have time to go inside and so didn’t consider what sort of business endeavor decorates itself with discarded garments. In search of food I would never enter such a place. I prefer the food to be naked, certainly, but I doubt badly drawn anthropomorph mice are on the menu, which means they are probably doing the serving and I do not desire service from them.
Nor did I eat at the Hunter’s Lodge all [I] can eat Bambi Buffet. I think the culinary-conscious French took the wrong message from that film. Maybe Disneyland Paris also has a petting zoo where visitors are encouraged to jeer at baby elephants while feeding them liquor.
No, I ate at Earl of Sandwich USA (since 1762 since 2004). Even though it was in France and named after somebody English.
This object buzzes when your sandwich is ready to be retrieved. That is all it does. Logically it should be about the size and weight of a hockey puck. It is not a drink coaster. It must be returned when the sandwich is fetched and the table is made of grey metal that would not be sensitive to minor liquid abrasion anyway.
I had thought “gosh what an uncreative gimmick for a restaurant” but evidently the place was indeed started by the present Earl of Sandwich. Also the inventor of Planet Hollywood, whose name is Earl (I cannot guarantee that he has a mustache). So you see it makes perfect sense. Earl probably got drunk one day and proclaimed “hey wouldn’t it be neat if the actual earl of sandwich had a sandwich joint? Hey I’m a millionaire! I can call him up!” And then the fellow went along with it, even though as a direct descendent he ought to know that his ancestor merely popularized the existent but nameless “bread and meat” of the lower class by consuming it in the presence of other nobles, and that putting a birth date on it or implying that this 9-year-old snack shack chain employs precious family recipes is absurd.
And yet the sandwiches are wrapped in SOLID GOLD, so there must be something special about them.
How about that. I said I didn’t have time to talk about France and I did anyway. Perhaps this can work.
Or perhaps it is through working.
As an unofficial United Americonia ambassador to France, I feel it is my obligation to share the most beautiful sights of its capital city with anyone who gets in my way. Here now midway through my experience -on my host country’s most celebrated day of celebration, no less- are pictures taken at some of the grandest and also some lesser known (but no less grand) spots.
La Tour Eiffel
Notre Dame de Paris
Arc de Triomphe
Place de l’Alma
Musée Carnavalet
Jardin des Tuileries
Jardin du Luxembourg
Château de Vaux-le-Vicomte
Jardin du Carrousel
Musée du Louvre
And finally, since I have not been able to upload any real art of my own in quite some whiles,
Peter Paul Rubens’ “The Council of the Gods” from the Marie de’ Medici cycle at the Musée du Louvre
If I can afford to get in, that is!