ellyah:

th3rm0pyl43:

prettydeathmachine:

th3rm0pyl43:

prettydeathmachine:

force-scream:

th3rm0pyl43:

Some headcanons about the Death Star nobody asked for:

  • Wilhuff Tarkin is one of, like, 5 Imperial officers who actively endorse the DS-1 project à la “this is a symbol of our might! we must build this thing!”. Most officers who even know about it (before the Battle of Yavin) are cautiously okay with it at best and slightly disturbed by the idea of a piece of machinery that’s able to blow up a planet in 0.5 seconds at worst.
  • Continuing on that notion – after the Battle of Yavin, it’s pretty much impossible to keep the Death Star a secret. As a result, a lot of officers get thinking, and by the time the second Death Star is unveiled to a select few commanders, most of them are horrified.
  • Admiral Piett loathes the Death Star as a concept. In his own words (to Luke in Nothing Left to Burn), “it is a profound insult to everything the Imperial Navy stands for – loyalty, distinction, honor. Constructing the means to destroy a planet…”. He goes on to talk trash about the Tarkin Doctrine and how it no longer serves its purpose as inspiration to fight for the Empire.
  • General Veers doesn’t like it either, throwing some gallows humor into the figurative pot. “Keep going with this planet-blow-uppity business, and I’ll be all out of a job.” (A nod to Empire at War, in which blowing up all the planets in a single campaign makes it impossible to fight ground battles.)
  • Moff Jerjerrod hates his job. He hates DS-2, too, and when he discovers Piett’s shared opinon of what he calls Spheroid Abomination II, they meet for a glass of Ithorian rum and get salty together.

ohhh where do you think the idea of the Death Star came from? was Palpatine that came up with it or did it came from someone else? if it was Palpatine what would inspire him to come up with the idea of giant space station that can blow up a planet?

My supposition always was that Palpatine was a lazy ass sith. One day he probably thought, hmm this whole complete domination thing would go more expediently if I could just blow up the whole planet opposing me in the slightest. And he was a practiced politician, so I can easily see him making a selling point on the DS: it will be cheaper in the long run than troops, ground invasions or otherwise, as their no equipping, training, recruiting, caring for them etc is expensive and time consuming. Then all the various vehicles of war, armaments, production, maintenance, raw materials, and so on and so on. There’s also no way anyone can screw up the mission since it’s literally just dusting a whole planet. I don’t know who he’d explain this to, I can just hear it though. I totally loathe the entire idea and find it extraordinarily wasteful and…ridiculous. Like people who drive monster trucks around the city lol literally no one needs that, and it clearly implies making up for something lacking in the individual. Sidious does a lot of things that point to a person with serious small man syndrome. Maybe the DS-1 and 2 were seriously just as simple as his little man issues being subconsciously manifested. At. All. Times.

Little man issues in machine form, lmao. This is gold.

#emperor shit lord  #all the way  

True!

lmao why thank you! I’m still beyond amused by the sheer gold that is Spherical Abomination! Instead of initiating destruction it’s abominating. Not launching or anything. Abominating.

I just came up with something else!
Between the two of them, Piett and Jerjerrod refer to DS-2 as “Nightmare Moon”. Because it sounds cool and it’s no moon. :V

It actually is canon that most Imperial military personnel loathed the Death Star and were secretly happy that the Rebels destroyed it. Because that station went against everything they believed and against their own values of honor in warfare. Not to say they were glad about the lives lost. Not in the slightest. But losing that abomination was a bonus points for them. And let’s not forget that even Vader hated that thing, but he had no saying on that matter. And I think we all know that Palpatine held almost no real loyalty from the military…their loyalty lied on the figure of Darth Vader (even with his penchant for chokings…)

I like to believe most of them were just waiting for the walking corpse to drop dead…

thegirlwithgoldeyes:

thegirlwithgoldeyes:

She had curves in all the wrong places. She had a boob sticking out of her kneecap and I’d never seen an ass on the back of someone’s head before

She had legs that went on forever. And ever, and ever. Legs going on into the endless primordial void from which we all came from and to which we shall all return. Her toes touched infinity, her hips perched on the cessation of existence.

Words that Survived by Getting Fossilized in Idioms

pyrrhiccomedy:

nevver:

  1. wend
    You rarely see a “wend” without a “way.” You can wend your way through a crowd or down a hill, but no one wends to bed or to school. However, there was a time when English speakers would wend to all kinds of places. “Wend” was just another word for “go” in Old English. The past tense of “wend” was “went” and the past tense of “go” was “gaed.” People used both until the 15th century, when “go” became the preferred verb, except in the past tense where “went” hung on, leaving us with an outrageously irregular verb.
  2. deserts
    The “desert” from the phrase “just deserts” is not the dry and sandy kind, nor the sweet post-dinner kind. It comes from an Old French word for “deserve,” and it was used in English from the 13th century to mean “that which is deserved.” When you get your just deserts, you get your due. In some cases, that may mean you also get dessert, a word that comes from a later French borrowing.
  3. eke
    If we see “eke” at all these days, it’s when we “eke out” a living, but it comes from an old verb meaning to add, supplement, or grow. It’s the same word that gave us “eke-name” for “additional name,” which later, through misanalysis of “an eke-name” became “nickname.”
  4. sleight
    “Sleight of hand” is one tricky phrase. “Sleight” is often miswritten as “slight” and for good reason. Not only does the expression convey an image of light, nimble fingers, which fits well with the smallness implied by “slight,” but an alternate expression for the concept is “legerdemain,” from the French léger de main,“ literally, “light of hand.” “Sleight” comes from a different source, a Middle English word meaning “cunning” or “trickery.” It’s a wily little word that lives up to its name.

  5. roughshod
    Nowadays we see this word in the expression “to run/ride roughshod” over somebody or something, meaning to tyrannize or treat harshly. It came about as a way to describe the 17th century version of snow tires. A “rough-shod” horse had its shoes attached with protruding nail heads in order to get a better grip on slippery roads. It was great for keeping the horse on its feet, but not so great for anyone the horse might step on.
  6. fro
    The “fro” in “to and fro” is a fossilized remnant of a Northern English or Scottish way of pronouncing “from.” It was also part of other expressions that didn’t stick around, like “fro and till,” “to do fro” (to remove), and “of or fro” (for or against).
  7. hue
    The “hue” of “hue and cry,” the expression for the noisy clamor of a crowd, is not the same “hue” as the term we use for color. The color one comes from the Old English word híew, for “appearance.” This hue comes from the Old French hu or heu, which was basically an onomatopoeia, like “hoot.”
  8. lurch
    When you leave someone “in the lurch,” you leave them in a jam, in a difficult position. But while getting left in the lurch may leave you staggering around and feeling off-balance, the “lurch” in this expression has a different origin than the staggery one. The balance-related lurch comes from nautical vocabulary, while the lurch you get left in comes from an old French backgammon-style game called lourche. Lurch became a general term for the situation of beating your opponent by a huge score. By extension it came to stand for the state of getting the better of someone or cheating them.
  9. umbrage
    “Umbrage” comes from the Old French ombrage (shade, shadow), and it was once used to talk about actual shade from the sun. It took on various figurative meanings having to do with doubt and suspicion or the giving and taking of offense. To give umbrage was to offend someone, to “throw shade.” However, these days when we see the term “umbrage” at all, it is more likely to be because someone is taking, rather than giving it.
  10. shrift
    We might not know what a shrift is anymore, but we know we don’t want to get a short one. “Shrift” was a word for a confession, something it seems we might want to keep short, or a penance imposed by a priest, something we would definitely want to keep short. But the phrase “short shrift” came from the practice of allowing a little time for the condemned to make a confession before being executed. So in that context, shorter was not better.

Holy shit, “giving umbrage” literally means “to throw shade”

Words that Survived by Getting Fossilized in Idioms

niyochara:

Fathers with Their Firsborn

hmm maybe i should upload this in Father’s Day, but nevermind, already draw this now and also tomorrow is Children’s Day. Happy Children’s Day 20 November 2013! 😀

too lazy to detailed the fabric and design.. and i dont really like the color, again it too yellow, wish this dont hurt your eyes >.<

emmahay:

I’m on a Hobbit rewatch right now. I did like the Dol Guldur scenes with the White Council – for all the other faults of the films – because it was unexpected and Galadriel was given more opportunity to show just how scary she can be. 

Galadriel has a very interesting history, and there was a time when she didn’t solely use magic. This is an armour concept for her, back in the First Age days, based on a sea serpent scales/feathers mix. I have yet to brave the Silmarillion, but there are great posts around on Tumblr that go into her backstory. ETA: later correction with more detail, better proportions.