• Smogon Premier League is here and the team collection is now available. Support your team!

Post your searing hot takes

sometimes the curtains are just blue. the curtains have to be some color, so why not blue? of course sometimes it being blue has another meaning, but not every detail has meaning. sometimes mundane details are just that. sometimes the curtains are blue because the curtains are blue.
My current stance on this is as follows:

1. Sometimes the curtains are blue because it was a commonly available dye in that area for any of a number of reasons. Criticism has historically been pretty bad at accepting speculative fiction, and worldbuilding can easily get misidentified as metaphor because of this.

2. Visual sources don't have the luxury of completely skimming over irrelevant details. The curtains may be uncoloured or possibly not even exist in a text, but if the camera happens to look at the window, having the curtains be the missing texture magenta checkerboard draws a lot of undesirable attention to them. Much like with the note above, this extra constraint does not make visual media lesser.
 
My current stance on this is as follows:

1. Sometimes the curtains are blue because it was a commonly available dye in that area for any of a number of reasons. Criticism has historically been pretty bad at accepting speculative fiction, and worldbuilding can easily get misidentified as metaphor because of this.

2. Visual sources don't have the luxury of completely skimming over irrelevant details. The curtains may be uncoloured or possibly not even exist in a text, but if the camera happens to look at the window, having the curtains be the missing texture magenta checkerboard draws a lot of undesirable attention to them. Much like with the note above, this extra constraint does not make visual media lesser.
Ooh magenta curtains...
 
The curtains being blue has significance if it leads us to interesting and edifying analysis. "Meaning" is a human-imposed quality, not one inherent to anything.
This is the root yeah.

The blue curtains are a choice, really many choices - the choice to have a setting where curtains fit in (probably), the choice to explicitly include and draw notice to the curtains, and the choice to make them one specific color. Maybe those choices matter, maybe they don’t. But you don’t have to have the curtains or give them a color, so maybe the choice to include them means something, says something, or accomplishes some goal.

If one cares about understanding the effects and causes of authors’ choices, then they can form their own opinion on whether it matters that the curtains are blue. If it matters, they can explain why.

Generally, good media has reasons why many of its choices are effective - whether those choices and reasons are on purpose or not.
 
Last edited:
sometimes the curtains are just blue. the curtains have to be some color, so why not blue? of course sometimes it being blue has another meaning, but not every detail has meaning. sometimes mundane details are just that. sometimes the curtains are blue because the curtains are blue.
sometimes the curtains are "blue" as "blue" is the fundamental opposite of "red". to the "chinese" "red" is a symbol of "life". by forcing the eyes to percieve "blue" instead of "red" you can separate the "life" of the "body" from the "life" of the "soul". by separating the "body" from the "soul" you allow a gap from which the "root" can be accessed.
 
sometimes the curtains are "blue" as "blue" is the fundamental opposite of "red". to the "chinese" "red" is a symbol of "life". by forcing the eyes to percieve "blue" instead of "red" you can separate the "life" of the "body" from the "life" of the "soul". by separating the "body" from the "soul" you allow a gap from which the "root" can be accessed.
So, like, this is completely off-topic, but I have this rant stored up anyway


Magic: the Gathering groups its mechanics into five colours, with each one generally considered to have two close/'ally' colours and two further/'enemy' colours. These relationships haven't changed even as other aspects of the design have evolved (though explicit colour mentions in cards are a lot rarer nowadays). In particular, I want to make the case that having Red in its current position of an enemy to Blue doesn't really make sense.

Part 1: Progress and Tradition, Order and Chaos

It's generally said that Red and Blue aren't just enemies, but that their rivalry is more prominent than the other hostile relationships the components have (Blue/Green and Red/White). I don't think this pans out in practice. Mechanically speaking, I'd consider the Blue/Green matchup to be the most prominent by a noticeable margin.

Blue has the most synergy with artifacts and availability of creatures with Flying, two things that Green excels at destroying (one of Green's common keywords is Reach, which is a direct counter to Flying). Blue, for its part, is great at preventing Green's big creatures from attacking and getting around its blockers (Flying even does the latter when not interrupted).

Red and Blue also don't really have any opposition in terms of their philosophies. They form the archetypal mad scientist: Red's emotion and recklessness paired with Blue's love of knowledge and pushing limits. Meanwhile, as the section title alludes to, Blue/Green and White/Red have major aspects that are directly opposed. I've even seen around a refusal to accept fate as something that binds Blue and Black together, when I can't see Red liking having status imposed on it either.

Part 2: Wizards cast Fireball

Mechanically, there's a lot of overlap between Red and Blue, something that otherwise often occurs with ally colour pairs. Red's focus on speed pairs directly with Blue's focus on time, giving Red limited access to a lot of Blue's toolkit: temporary copies and control changes while Blue gets permanent access, extra combat phases while Blue gets full extra turns, discarding before drawing while Blue draws directly.

Meanwhile, one of Red's biggest mechanics feels like it's artificially limited from being available in Blue. Blue disregards the board state in order to win from the hand, and as a result has amassed an appreciable number of unusual win conditions to avoid the standard route of attacking with creatures. Burn would logically be included in that sphere, at least more fitting than having the card draw colour want to delete its draw pile. Even when trying to limit this aspect, the overlap still bleeds through. Psionic Blast and Prodigal Sorcerer are standard damage in Blue, just because that's what Intelligence-based characters get up to in fantasy. Meanwhile, Yuki-Onna throws the idea of water and ice being Blue-aligned because it deals damage, darn it!

Part 3: friendship ended with Black

There's one more mechanical niche that feels Blue-adjacent: rituals (spells that directly give mana). Blue itself doesn't use them since it uses its artifact synergy for supplemental mana instead, but that effect is still how to get a fundamental resource from the hand while it's traditionally from the board. This effect was strongly Black-aligned, but it's been shifted to Red over time. To me, this is a result of mana burn being removed. When you took damage for having unspent mana, it fit in with Black often having to deal with self-imposed negative effects. Without it, the only downside of not spending the mana immediately is not having it later. As such, it becomes aligned with Red's speed focus. But it being Blue-adjacent hasn't changed.

Part 4: Loose ends

The other side of Red and Blue being allies is that Red/Green and Blue/Black become enemy pairs while Black/Green is an ally pair. Red/Green rivalry also feels pretty well-supported, pitting Red's speed and land destruction against Green building up tons of lands to fuel massive spells. Meanwhile, the increasing amount of stuff you can do with land cards brings that same ramp closer to Black's ability to search their deck for a silver bullet. Blue/Black doesn't have as much against them, I admit, but I suppose once again one of the colours needs to be without an archrival.
 
sometimes the curtains are "blue" as "blue" is the fundamental opposite of "red". to the "chinese" "red" is a symbol of "life". by forcing the eyes to percieve "blue" instead of "red" you can separate the "life" of the "body" from the "life" of the "soul". by separating the "body" from the "soul" you allow a gap from which the "root" can be accessed.
So, like, this is completely off-topic, but I have this rant stored up anyway


Magic: the Gathering groups its mechanics into five colours, with each one generally considered to have two close/'ally' colours and two further/'enemy' colours. These relationships haven't changed even as other aspects of the design have evolved (though explicit colour mentions in cards are a lot rarer nowadays). In particular, I want to make the case that having Red in its current position of an enemy to Blue doesn't really make sense.

Part 1: Progress and Tradition, Order and Chaos

It's generally said that Red and Blue aren't just enemies, but that their rivalry is more prominent than the other hostile relationships the components have (Blue/Green and Red/White). I don't think this pans out in practice. Mechanically speaking, I'd consider the Blue/Green matchup to be the most prominent by a noticeable margin.

Blue has the most synergy with artifacts and availability of creatures with Flying, two things that Green excels at destroying (one of Green's common keywords is Reach, which is a direct counter to Flying). Blue, for its part, is great at preventing Green's big creatures from attacking and getting around its blockers (Flying even does the latter when not interrupted).

Red and Blue also don't really have any opposition in terms of their philosophies. They form the archetypal mad scientist: Red's emotion and recklessness paired with Blue's love of knowledge and pushing limits. Meanwhile, as the section title alludes to, Blue/Green and White/Red have major aspects that are directly opposed. I've even seen around a refusal to accept fate as something that binds Blue and Black together, when I can't see Red liking having status imposed on it either.

Part 2: Wizards cast Fireball

Mechanically, there's a lot of overlap between Red and Blue, something that otherwise often occurs with ally colour pairs. Red's focus on speed pairs directly with Blue's focus on time, giving Red limited access to a lot of Blue's toolkit: temporary copies and control changes while Blue gets permanent access, extra combat phases while Blue gets full extra turns, discarding before drawing while Blue draws directly.

Meanwhile, one of Red's biggest mechanics feels like it's artificially limited from being available in Blue. Blue disregards the board state in order to win from the hand, and as a result has amassed an appreciable number of unusual win conditions to avoid the standard route of attacking with creatures. Burn would logically be included in that sphere, at least more fitting than having the card draw colour want to delete its draw pile. Even when trying to limit this aspect, the overlap still bleeds through. Psionic Blast and Prodigal Sorcerer are standard damage in Blue, just because that's what Intelligence-based characters get up to in fantasy. Meanwhile, Yuki-Onna throws the idea of water and ice being Blue-aligned because it deals damage, darn it!

Part 3: friendship ended with Black

There's one more mechanical niche that feels Blue-adjacent: rituals (spells that directly give mana). Blue itself doesn't use them since it uses its artifact synergy for supplemental mana instead, but that effect is still how to get a fundamental resource from the hand while it's traditionally from the board. This effect was strongly Black-aligned, but it's been shifted to Red over time. To me, this is a result of mana burn being removed. When you took damage for having unspent mana, it fit in with Black often having to deal with self-imposed negative effects. Without it, the only downside of not spending the mana immediately is not having it later. As such, it becomes aligned with Red's speed focus. But it being Blue-adjacent hasn't changed.

Part 4: Loose ends

The other side of Red and Blue being allies is that Red/Green and Blue/Black become enemy pairs while Black/Green is an ally pair. Red/Green rivalry also feels pretty well-supported, pitting Red's speed and land destruction against Green building up tons of lands to fuel massive spells. Meanwhile, the increasing amount of stuff you can do with land cards brings that same ramp closer to Black's ability to search their deck for a silver bullet. Blue/Black doesn't have as much against them, I admit, but I suppose once again one of the colours needs to be without an archrival.
Order and Chaos
Jevil and Tasque Manager
Both are bluish
 
Crush 40 is actually not great. Basically every Crush 40 songs are some great vocals saying some MCU level lines backed by the most basic bitch ass guitar melody. There's often like, one or two actually good lines in a song, and the rest are just middling at best. What I'm Made Of opens with the most nothing line in existence, and yet it somehow gets praised to hell and back. There's very little of actual substance in these songs, and there's only so much the vocals can do to make hearing lines like "I don't care what you're thinking as you turn to me" for most of a song not induce cringe in me.
 
The beat of a song is far more important than the vocals, unless the vocals are genuinely offensive or nightcored to hell. If you don't like the vocals, just listen to an instrumental.
This really heavily depends on what you're listening to. There's a lot of lyrics-oriented stuff, particularly in hip-hop, where this would be kind of an insane thing to do. For genres like pop and rock, this is a more acceptable take, but it's not something I would universally recommend.
 
This really heavily depends on what you're listening to. There's a lot of lyrics-oriented stuff, particularly in hip-hop, where this would be kind of an insane thing to do. For genres like pop and rock, this is a more acceptable take, but it's not something I would universally recommend.
I’d argue you could do the same thing with hip-hop, too, but it does vary by artist.
 
A lot of popular 2010s artists were and at times still are really really overrated. Lorde and Donald Glover being peak examples of that. Lorde's concepts don't go anywhere and she lacks the self-reflection to have her music actually meaningful or emotional, it's why I dislike Melodrama quite a lot. I know she was a literal teen girl when she started her career but like, she called herself Lorde cause she likes medieval times and called her album Melodrama cause she likes Greek culture, she mentions a Tennis Court in her most popular song and her most emotional song is her being sad about an artist she liked that died that goes like "he's dead. sad". I don't know man. I usually like the work from kids when it's free and full of potential, even when it's corny or cringe, but Lorde never showed potential. And people don't like her music anymore since she and her audience grew up

And Donald Glover is a bad songwriter with mediocre rapping skills and concept albums that don't go anywhere. I liked it when he tried Neo Funk but his 2016 album only has very few good songs

XXXTENTACION and Logic have the same situation but they're criticized a lot already. J. Cole is corny and kinda stinky at times too but he's alright to good most of the time. I just can't shake the feeling that he'd smoke weed at the party and say nonsensical shit and think that he's a godlike philosopher for it. Would not smoke with him
 
sometimes the curtains are just blue. the curtains have to be some color, so why not blue? of course sometimes it being blue has another meaning, but not every detail has meaning. sometimes mundane details are just that. sometimes the curtains are blue because the curtains are blue.
my hot take is that "the curtains are just blue" has caused more anti-intellectualism than almost any other individual internet post and has done genuine and significant societal harm. sometimes the curtains are really just blue, but people use this to justify not having any reading comprehension more often than to actually criticize the tendency of pseudointellectuals to overanalyze everything
 
my hot take is that "the curtains are just blue" has caused more anti-intellectualism than almost any other individual internet post and has done genuine and significant societal harm. sometimes the curtains are really just blue, but people use this to justify not having any reading comprehension more often than to actually criticize the tendency of pseudointellectuals to overanalyze everything
maybe this is just because of the depth of writing regarding things i like but overanalysis is never the real cause of the pseudointellectuals in communities i'm involved in. instead it's because of some weird misconception pushed by the franchise's wiki that never got corrected because one part of the franchise is only available as a nearly 20 year old movie anthology and no one's read angel notes for some reason. or kagetsu tohya. or plus-disc. or hollow ataraxia. or any of the melty games.
 
Honestly, I love overanalysis ... of in-universe stuff. Worldbuilding is great, whether that's done officially or by fans putting tons of thought into something that clearly wasn't thought through. I think it's in no small part exactly because I love this style of analysis that I get annoyed easily by metaphorical readings. They come off as arrogant and dismissive: an insistence that the Artistic Interpretation™ is important enough that the text and setting itself is irrelevant by comparison. I don't care about your allegedly real, deeper, more insightful, etc. reasons why the curtains are blue right now, I am busy tracing a supply chain for blue dye.
 
Back
Top