the fact that the Russian language doesn’t have articles makes me go ??????????????? because in a native English speaker’s head it sounds like a hilarious shitpost type thing
so when you ask someone “Где водка?” it translates to “where is the vodka?”
but in my horrible backwards english brain if I don’t see any articles I assume they aren’t there, so yelling “ГДЕ ВОДКА” translates to “WHERE VODKA” like some kind of drunken maniac who you definitely should not give vodka to
Speaking as a Russian-American who speaks the language and knows a fair share of Russian-Russians, even if Russians did have articles they would still slam open the door yelling “WHERE VODKA” at all times.
Like, I want to be made into a beautiful glass thing. I want to be something treasured for a long time and rarely talked about. I want to live in the home of someone who loved me, and touched now and then in silent memory.
I want people to forget that I’m in there, I want the memory of what I am to pass out of the family’s knowledge. I want to be given away, and put out in a thriftstore somewhere.
I want someone to buy my ashes for $4.99 and put me in a window and love the colors. I want to cast beautiful, fractious and curving sunlight across the wall, sparkling and glowing and shimmering, depending on the time of day. I want someone to take a picture of me with the moon behind me, luminous and mysterious.
I want a witch to buy me and put me in her work room. I want an artist to leave me on their worktable. I want to inspire people and make them smile. I want to be warm from sunlight or chilly from the cool air. I want to be packed in newspaper carefully when they move. I want to be given as a holiday or graduation present to someone’s kid, I want to be given as a housewarming gift as a reminder of home.
And god, then, hopefully some day, I want to roll off the table, I want that globe to crack.
And then I want to haunt the living shit out of the future.
Omg XD I don’t know who you are, but can we be friends. This was the most beautiful thing in the world and the ending made it better.
“Ew you’re an adult why are you in fandom” Kid, if being mocked for fandom shit wasn’t enough to stop me when I was an actual 15 year old, hearing it from a 15 year old when I’m 30 is genuinely hilarious
I was thinking today about Leverage–as one does–and about the various grifting styles we see the team employ, and how most of them have a very particular grift strategy that they rarely stray from when they have to be the main one in the spotlight. And what I think is really interesting is how their strategies are often exact opposites.
Eliot’s syle of grifting is to flatten himself, to make himself seem simple. He plays nerds, ‘manipulate-able’ fighters, awkward librarians and accountants and basically people it’s easy to dismiss or to pigeonhole as one thing (whereas in reality he’s anything but that). In direct contrast, Sophie’s entire grift style plays up her mysteriousness. She draws people in because they want to know more about her, because she’s intriguing and fascinating and there’s the suggestion that if only the mark were worthy of her time and attention, she knows things they could only dream of.
Nate’s style is to be incredibly obnoxious. Which, let’s all congratulate him on playing to his strengths, first of all. But second of all, it’s a really interesting grift style, because basically it manipulates people by annoying them. While Sophie draws people in and directs their attention and clouds their judgement by making them want her around, Nate directs people’s attention and clouds their judgement by making them want him to leave. They’re both very effective at getting a person to do exactly what they want!
And while Eliot’s grift style almost always involves him pretending to be bad at something (physically harmless alien nerd, unsophisticated boxer who can’t people good, etc), Hardison’s grifts almost always involve him being an expert at something (Iceman, FBI agent, even conspiracy theorist) and using his expertise to gain access, authority, etc.
And then I was thinking about Parker and trying to pin down her style, and I realized that another reason why she was an excellent choice of leader is that she can kind of do them all. Every grift she does has that tinge of ‘weird’ to it, because that’s who she is, but she’s able to switch between strategies in a way that the others never really employ. She can be unassuming and underestimated (Alice, baby reporter), off-putting and upsetting (that pop star with the duck), an expert who comes in and takes over (FBI agent), or intriguing and enticing (that scene with the diamond necklace, you know the one, we all know the one, you whispered “oh no she’s hot” at the screen don’t lie). I wouldn’t say she’s the best grifter, that’s definitely Sophie, but she might be the most versatile one.
Basically Parker is the best, Leverage is the best, we all knew that, thank you for your time.
let’s all congratulate him on playing to his strengths