afrofabulous

Do you think that 28 is too old to try to pursue a career in art on your own terms? I wanted to be a 3D animator for as long as I can remember, but when I got to college I realized that going to college for it wasn't for me. The school and the environment was horrible and I was completely uninspired to continue animation. I went to school for fashion illustration after that and I although my teachers thought my art was truly beautiful, I didn't get to finish because I started a family.

diananock:

bigbigtruck:

(cont.) I became inspired again recently and I have been drawing and sketching everyday (for the past two years) as well as learning animation on my own. I am heavily influenced by your webcomic, but I just wanted to know if it was too late to pursue my dream without school and by myself at 28?

I started TJ and Amal at 31, with a weak art education and zero experience in comics, so you can probably guess where I stand on the matter!

I wish our culture didn’t place such heavy emphasis on “making it” in your teens and twenties; that the (justifiable!) attention paid to prodigies wouldn’t set “prodigy” as the norm.  This kind of BS does everyone a disservice.

If you have a dream and the resources/ability to pursue it, there’s no reason to sit it out just because “everyone makes it by 25.” Because everyone DOESN’T make it by 25. Some do, some don’t, whatever.
What’s more, age can bring experience that will inform your work — work you couldn’t have made at 20 or 25.

Sometimes when I get discouraged about this stuff, it helps to remember an anecdote I read a few years ago—
A retiree mentions to her friend that she’s considering going back to college and finishing her degree.
"What, at 65?" says her friend, "You’ll be at least 40 years older than everyone else in class!"
To which the lady replies, “oh, so you think I should wait till I’m 70?”

There’s no going backwards.

Good luck!

E.K. is right! It’s never too late to pursue something you’re passionate about. I’ve had wannabe cartoonists come up to me at cons and ask me this very question, certain that because they weren’t masters of the craft by 20 or 30 or some other arbitrary age, that they’d never get anywhere. Anyone can grow and improve and hone a craft as long as they’re willing to put in the time and effort!

Remember that it’s not a race. The only true measure of your growth is looking at your past work and seeing how much you’ve improved since then, not comparing yourself to others. (Which, I realize, is easier said than done.)

Word.

1,188 notes Reblog word

azertip:

syd mead

(Source: bremenmask, via comicauthors)

1,307 notes Reblog

baturday:

"What lovely, lovely birds."

(Source: theoretical-people)

82 notes Reblog

420 easter is prolly the best time to wear this shirt.
Pardon the duckface; don’t selfie much, had to get it out of my system.

420 easter is prolly the best time to wear this shirt.

Pardon the duckface; don’t selfie much, had to get it out of my system.

2 notes Reblog 420 easter gpoy I'm sadly entirely sober :/

I don’t want to suggest that there is nothing left to experience before original works of art except a certain sense of awe, because they have survived, because they are genuine, because they are absurdly valuable. A lot more is possible. But only if art is stripped of the false mystery and the false religiosity which surrounds it. This religiosity, usually linked with cash value, but always invoked in the name of culture and civilisation is in fact a substitute for what paintings lost when the camera made them reproducible.

(Source: gwilym)

6 notes Reblog

A clarification upon LABELS BAD post from earlier…

I am not advocating for an all out abolishing of labels in that Great Straight White Cis Male tradition that is eager to consider itself EVERYMAN and is the de facto antichrist for every counter-culture out there.

I think I might have a somewhat nuanced position here, sorry! If you’re gonna point me in the direction of articles like this and this—thanks, momolikesthings—we are already on the same page, word for word.

Also, I am speaking from a queer position—again, sorry to disappoint! I’m truly baffled by the academic-flavored, abstract functional distinctions between bisexual, pansexual, polysexual, etc (I could be any/all of those, who knows?!)—and the need for that level of segregation within the queer space. I understand that the proliferation of labels is somewhat subversive wrt binaries we’re trying to undermine, but it is not as subversive as it thinks it is. The super fine standardized breakdowns are only useful when people are put into tables and it’s weird to be super concerned about which slice of the queer pie chart one is in. It seems like an identity notation invented for easy tagging in centralized blogging platforms. I guess that can be cool, if you’re into that sort of thing, ehhhhghghh…

I am also trying to say that the fashion in which this tradition defends what constitutes the SELF is flawed as fuck and from the gate modeled on ancient busted patriarchal conceptions of sexual preference/gender identity as an inherent property—as opposed to something one acts out, something one demonstrates in their day-to-day existence. These tags anchor their legitimacy in that kind of a priori inherent Truth which is only being unveiled and as such is unassailable, unmovable, permanent. It just moves the goalposts of true freedom in interpersonal relationships. And it demands a certain compliance of behavior with identity which is a direct heir to the patriarchal binary traditions.

Recently someone described themselves to me as Slightly queer; I like men even when they’re women, which is pithy and fun and infinitely more descriptive than, um, whatever that would be in queertaxonomese. At the point where it matters, i.e. interpersonal level, these kinds of nuances and many many many more will be conveyed.

Individual power to define one’s own identity and group belonging is of paramount importance and I have no interest in taking it away so as to level the entirety of mankind into one mold. On the double-plus contrary. This is why I see this attempt at constraining and mapping out what queer can mean as dumb.

4 notes Reblog

kiriamaya:

[Image: Cute drawings of three couples, each with a label indicating what kind of couple they are: a gay cis man and bisexual trans man, a lesbian trans woman and a pansexual cis woman, and two polysexual nonbinary individuals. Underneath each is the caption: “We are a queer couple able to reproduce.”]

boku-no-poltergeist:

can we stop referring to all sex that could possibly result in pregnancy as “heterosexual reproduction” now

YESSSSSSSS

(Also, “pregnant person” does not necessarily mean “woman” for the seventy-millionth time)

I kinda run the risk of Mike Krahuliking myself here. I really don’t mean to be flippant about any of this, it’s just how I talk. It is also a somewhat tangential thought. So:

What is the point of having and defending gender labels at all? They’re untrustworthy patriarchal impositions of a structure of understanding that seeks to define and taxonomize the living bejesus out of everything so as to more easily manage (not to understand) things from a top-down perspective.

Gender is performative, its dynamics and behaviors we’re supposed to emulate are beaten into our heads from day one with a comprehensive, unyielding societal push, involving everything from low hum of monkey-see-monkey-do edged with domains of stigma, to punitive puritanical laws and violence.

The proliferation of super granular identity signifiers and the general rush of tumblr nation to embrace everyone’s Declared Inner True Self as the Real Unassailable Material Identity makes it hard to change one’s mind, try new things, step outside of the now self-imposed prison of labels, play with the wrong toys, have an adventure, grow. They are a barrier to entry, just as binding as binaries we’re trying to shed. When leaving the closet, you have to leave the correct one, otherwise you may have to answer to the gay police or social justice warriors or whatever authority’s drawing up the map.

Queer seems to me the only valuable label—it means ACHTUNG! Elaboration in order! That way we leave room for the messiness of the individual, without having to carry around a fucking tag cloud.

It is of no small importance that the queer umbrella also creates a community, the widest possible one from the parts therein. Maybe we wouldn’t even need queer, in a world where people simply don’t make hard, charged assumptions about gender, sexual preference, etc.

As I am writing this I feel like I might be mangling a wide array of identities, gender expression and sexual preference under queerness in a potentially myopic hubrisy mansplainy way. Maybe it is worth noting that these categories need to exist for some structural reason I am not thinking of right now, but…

It wasn’t until about the mid nineteenth century that GAY became an identity; we didn’t conceive of PEOPLE as gay/homosexual, but individual acts of intercourse. Just now, looking for more in-depth thinking on the subject, I found this bit by Foucault who was the one who observed that semantic shift:

Homosexuality appeared as one of the forms of sexuality when it was transposed from the practice of sodomy into a kind of interior androgyny, a hermaphrodism of the soul. The sodomite had been a temporary aberration; the homosexual was now a species.

Who is to say how unnecessarily complicated our perspective about any of this even is due to the language we choose to frame it in? Who is to say that a vast number of people aren’t some kind of queer under nuanced circumstances, but shudder to play around due to having to own up to a new identity to do so? No one likes tourists and the denizens of the queer alphabet soup are no different.

I dunno, I guess my point is, who cares about this gritty multi-axis taxonomy? Why don’t we just go out there in whatever clothes feel right for the day, fuck the people we’re attracted to at the time, mod our bods until they feel true—without wasting all this air on abstractions meant to pen in what seems to be infinitely flexible and up in the air on one hand, but buried under millennia of structured patriarchal thought on the other?

From where I’m standing all these labels seem to be in favor of those patriarchal thought structures rather than a liberation from them.

(Source: pokemoneggs, via comicauthors)

145,026 notes Reblog

historicaltimes:

Nikola Tesla in his laboratory c.1899

what a piiiimp

historicaltimes:

Nikola Tesla in his laboratory c.1899

what a piiiimp

1,172 notes Reblog

"Five months of peace is just what I want." - The Shining (1980)

Kubrick’s one point perspective is porn to me.

(Source: vintagegal, via vintagegal)

23,121 notes Reblog

historicaltimes:

German troops use a Schwellenpflug to destroy rail tracks while withdrawing from Soviet territory, 1944 -
namraka:


A railroad plough (also known as a Schienenwolf (‘rail wolf’) or Schwellenpflug (‘sleepers plough’)) is a rail vehicle which supports an immensely strong, hook-shaped ‘plough’. It is used for destruction of rail track in warfare, as part of a scorched earth policy, so that it becomes unusable for the enemy.
In use, the plough is lowered to rip up the middle of the track as it is hauled along by a locomotive. This action breaks the wooden ties which forces the steel rails out of alignment, making the line impassable by later rail vehicles; bridges and signalling equipment also suffer serious damage. From Wikipedia

historicaltimes:

German troops use a Schwellenpflug to destroy rail tracks while withdrawing from Soviet territory, 1944 -

namraka:

A railroad plough (also known as a Schienenwolf (‘rail wolf’) or Schwellenpflug (‘sleepers plough’)) is a rail vehicle which supports an immensely strong, hook-shaped ‘plough’. It is used for destruction of rail track in warfare, as part of a scorched earth policy, so that it becomes unusable for the enemy.

In use, the plough is lowered to rip up the middle of the track as it is hauled along by a locomotive. This action breaks the wooden ties which forces the steel rails out of alignment, making the line impassable by later rail vehicles; bridges and signalling equipment also suffer serious damage. From Wikipedia

133 notes Reblog