Thoughts

Thoughts

  • We Each Alone Awaken Each Day In A Fog

    Though usually unnoticed unless our metaphorical spirit remains too long adrift, each one of us awakens every single day wholly surrounded by a fog that is the mystery of life.

    By our vision that penetrates woefully shallow, we can only barely glimpse the people and things we keep nearest to ourselves–our family, our friends, our jobs, manifestations of our values, art we hang on our walls, objects we keep in our pockets, new ideas we met in a book yesterday, phantasmal mirages of our hopes, reminders of our seething hatred–and they provide us guide to begin clearing a way through the dense haze.

    On our day’s journey, as long as we are moving about, we will undoubtedly pass by, and occasionally take on to keep close for one reason or the other, new people and things.

    We choose what we follow through the fog, if anything at all, but regardless of where we are led through it or how much space within it we clear, at the end of the day we remain within the fog, which stretches beyond our knowable universe and which will close back around as we sleep to wholly embrace again, only held off from absorbing into and filling us completely by the continual, clearing movement of our dreams, which continue to seek clarity in their limited domain within the body that rests.

    But again, like yesterday, our eyes will open to only the fog wall wrapping tightly around them and vague glimpses of the people and things we’ve kept closest to us through the night. As we do what we will with our day, we must remember those people and things, like us, can also only see that which they’ve kept closest to themselves. And so they, too, are invariably lost in the fog, regardless of their confidence or force of will.

    Maybe each day we are getting somewhere. Maybe we are not. Either way, it feels critically prudent to ensure we keep nearest to ourselves the best partners in exploration, people and things, we’ve been able and lucky enough yet to find.

  • On Video Game Development Documentaries and Half-Life’s 25th Anniversary

    Game development documentaries are always so interesting to me, especially those concerning the early days of studios and products that went on to become especially successful or, as in Half-Life’s case, iconic. Invariably in the docs I’ve seen, it’s always such a scrappy process that teeters, often multiple times, on the edge of project annihilation for one reason or the other but somehow ends up coming together to produce something special.

    The hour-long 25th Anniversary Half-Life documentary funded by Valve themselves and directed by Danny O’Dwyer of Noclip fame, reminiscing over the early days of Valve along with production of the classic game, is a fascinating watch, especially to Millennials such as myself who grew up significantly impacted by Half-Life (and its subsequent ecosystem of mods that has developed multiple legacies in its own right). But is also worth a watch to anyone interested in learning about some of the most important behind-the-scenes moments in the history of video games or wanting to see just how greatness is brewed, interestingly similarly across many disciplines and categories of creation, behind the curtain. There is much to be learned from pondering beyond the timeline testimonial and humorous anecdotes.

    The consistent takeaway I’ve gotten from this doc, just as many others before is: Do the work, as messy and unfocused at it will inevitably become, but while keeping a healthy degree of top-level control focused on ensuring production of a cohesive end-result that either achieves what the project set out to do or something equivalently satisfactory. Game dev most often involves teams (aside from rare cases such as Dean Dodrill crafting the majority of the exceptional Dust: An Elysian Tail alone), but I believe these principles hold equally true for solo work: Start with the best concept or premise you can, but get to it; do the work. And keep a regular feedback loop on how whatever you’re currently neck-deep in fits with the goal of putting together an overall quality project.

    I certainly fall into the perfectionist tendency trap of too much planning and architecting in desire to craft some kind of perfect thing that’s essentially finished before I even begin getting my hands dirty. I have many dormant projects with possibly thousands of hours spent in conceptual and pre-production stages left abandoned. I’ve learned the imprint of the process of the creation–that is, focused efforts over time–is not only inevitable, as it will continually alter results from initial intentions, but also invaluable in producing something more interesting and exciting than we could have ever conceived out of our static, preconceived ideas. Not that those ideas aren’t important, too. They are essential in providing a starting point and solid framework around which to work. Rather, it is a matter of balance, something people are not that good at in general (myself included).

    Back to the Half-Life doc, it’s funny that so much that seems thoroughly thought out in the end was really just ad-hoc solutions or accidents. For instance, in regards to the origins and true nature of the still-mysterious G-Man character, I’ve read over the years a number of extraordinarily detailed, labyrinthine theories that analyze his/its vocal mannerisms. And in this doc, the devs recall they were like, to the voice actor, “Yeah, these normal human takes are okay, but can you maybe give us something else?” And so the voice actor spat out some vaguely lizard-manish speak of his own on-the-spot fabrication, devs went “cool,” and those recordings played better so that’s what’s made the final product.

    I must say, so far in my game dev documentary watches, I’ve found more enjoyment particularly out of tales of classic game development rather than modern, because throughout the process of development of those oldies, the devs almost always were asking fundamental questions to the heart of what they were doing and why they were doing it. These days, the answer to too many of those basic questions are overly assumed, having become “industry standards,” and therefore continue to produce more derivative products that, even if they are well-received, don’t exceptionally stand out in the test of time. It’s no surprise that these days Indie games and outliers (like the Souls franchise) who aren’t afraid to ask those fundamental questions again are the principal generators of uniqueness in the industry and literal game-changers. As Half-Life was.

    So, check out the Half-Life 25th Anniversary Documentary on YouTube if you haven’t yet. Also recommended are really any one of the many, many great video game dev documentaries produced by Noclip, also available on YouTube. Or any of the multitude of fan retrospectives of practically any video game imaginable available… guess where. Simply search “retrospective” on YouTube and you will find the majority of results to be video game related. Often they are longer watches than beating the games themselves, and in many cases, just as or more rewarding.

    Upon this website, I write (okay, more like “plan to” in most cases) on an unrestrained number of topics, including entertainment (film, games, music, books, et al.), philosophy, and social issues, as well as am constantly working to create all manner of stuff. Amongst other projects, I’m currently writing a novel, of which you can read a sample of the first two chapters.

  • Social Recoil To Change, And The Importance of Art & Entertainment

    Both in person-to-person matters and societally, the closer to a painful truth you get, and especially to one that would be incompatible with a long-established status quo in which the other half has been comfortable, the more violent recoil from that challenge will be. However the challenged can, whether that be flexing of power/influence, breaking spirits, or taking distance, the more shut down from ever attempting to take matters there again they will try to render you.

    Most people live in morbid fear of these painful truths. And the oppressive response they live by. It’s one of the first transgressions children inflict upon each other as they move into the social realm. And we don’t stop. Becomes one of the hallmarks of human teenage years, as we’re grow into figuring out how to navigate the space of Other People. And, of course, we continue into adulthood. We don’t want a conversation. All communication and social interaction is purely for validation.

    Likelihood of this reaction and retribution renders direct confrontation often ineffective or even counter-productive. The way forward is an assault of subtlety. Nudges. Planting a seed in another and nursing it until the other develops enough fondness for the seedling to take over its care.

    What is there to say conservatively that’s more important than working to bolster the existing system? Nothing, until there is enough resistance to incentivize creation of propaganda. Art, where new ideas are explored and old ideas challenged, has always matched liberalism’s idea-openness, and therefore, naturally leaned liberal where there’s been freedom to. And unsurprisingly, because it often addresses painful truths, has faced censure and silencing, sometimes violent and most often by authority. But also from the mob. Even these days; conservatives are busy right now banning books in Florida and Texas.

    So art, and importantly by extension entertainment, has historically collectively worked to plant the seeds of progressive and potentially counter-cultural ideas subtly in the public’s collective garden of thought. Entertainment is the common man’s gateway to that garden. Different enough from the system to speak more deeply to us than anything in the system can, but also subtle enough to not generate a repulsive reaction, contributing to slow cultural change over generations.

    Art and entertainment is imperative to the steady march of social progress. Unhappy with the world, that’s where I decided, decades ago now, to focus my life’s work, at the expense of all else (including myself), if need be. More specifically, I chose to focus my efforts upon bridging the gap between the art and entertainment I prefer, and the ideas therein that point toward a better world, that don’t move the broader social needle as much as they could, only winning praise within appreciative niches, and the common man, variably open to new ideas but more regularly than not aggressively resistant to change.

  • Review: Scavengers Reign (or Australia in Space)

    In Scavengers Reign, there is a species of seemingly simple alien creatures that utilizes telepathy to order other alien creatures to bring it food, and one of this species uses this ability to control a person by way of wordlessly communicating and manipulating the person through dream-like evocation of memories and attached emotions. To what end? The creature’s mere sustenance? When later the relationship becomes symbiotic, and the creature’s actions take new directions, as unexplained as they are aggressively direct, deeper questions arise of its motives and the true nature of this relationship. What is this thing really? Is it really just some creature? Is it meant to be a symbolic representation of something to the human? Could it be both? How does this all work really? Big, compounding questions like these abound in the show, and these are just a small piece of one of multiple characters’ intersecting journeys in the collection of monumental mystery, horror, and wonder that is Scavengers Reign.

    The show is a twelve-episode animated science fiction series created by Joseph Bennett and Charles Huettner adapted from their eight-minute 2016 short and developed by Titmouse, Inc. and Green Street Studios. In the depths of space, a starship was critically damaged above a mysterious alien planet teeming with strange flora, fauna, and other oft-dangerous natural peculiarities. Three small groups of crew managed to escape the catastrophe, becoming scattered across the planet’s surface. Each struggled to survive the alien conditions for presumably years while lacking any greater knowledge of events beyond that their group alone lived. An event is witnessed by all three groups that compels each to begin trekking across this violently hostile and beautifully wondrous planet towards a singular, distant destination.

    Scavengers Reign‘s gorgeous animation and sublimely lush soundtrack would fight for stealing the show if they did not together cohesively generate such all-around effectively produced experiences scene after scene. Both elements are meticulously and lovingly crafted and deliver a broad variety of sights, sounds, and moods, not to be unexpected as the show jumps between disparate tales of multiple protagonists’ many day journeys across a planet’s many biomes.

    “This place is like a puzzle. Nothing really makes sense the way we know it,” a protagonist states. The show depicts the setting of this alien world and all its many natural peculiarities as though one was surveying the quarantined zone of Annihilation with the documentarian approach of Planet Earth. And speaking of zones, sprinkle a bit of Tarkovsky mind-bending metaphysicality into the mix. You never know precisely what to expect as a fresh scene begins, but you come to expect something new and probably weird will be presented to you nonetheless. Every detail of the world is drowned in layers of unexplained mystique that quickly turns the planet into a mysterious character in its own right.

    If all this sounds rather adult in nature, it generally is. The show is quite mature in its tone. It takes its time. It focuses on details. It shows rather than explains. It is unafraid to realistically portray the regular brutality of nature, gore and all. It regularly dives into imagery absurd, grotesque, and/or downright weird. Body horror abounds. Depiction of interpersonal relationships come across as natural and nuanced, as is the dialogue (and accompanying voice acting) that emerges from those. But, not all is realistic. There is a healthy dose of whimsical inventiveness, that borders on outlandish and would only ever work in animation, in the solution to quite a few plights as the episodes roll on. And it takes suspension of disbelief to accept how quickly derived and committed to some of these are. But these are relatively minor criticisms that do little to undo the overall exemplary quality of this show.

    The scope of everything combined–telescopic focus upon both the details and broader mechanisms of the natural world alongside plots of humans which seem increasingly dwarfed as the show goes on by being mere parts of… something incomprehensibly bigger and ultimately existential–gives an overarching grand philosophical air to Scavengers Reign. Reminds me of a Terrence Malick film in this way. And yet it does this unpretentiously, not saying a word to the effect, merely through what it chooses to show of its deep world and how. Underneath layers of high production value, what Scavengers Reign wants to do at its core is epic and beautiful.

    SCORE:

    4.5 / 5

    As of November 13th, 2023, Scavengers Reign is available to watch on Max.

    Spread word or, if you can afford to, click this banner to donate a couple bucks toward making my dream of consistent, uncompromised creation a financially feasible reality!

  • Review: The Killer (or The Smiths Greatest Hits The Movie)

    “From the beginning of history, the few have always exploited the many. This is the cornerstone of civilization. The blood and the mortar that binds all bricks. Whatever it takes, make sure you’re one of the few; not one of the many.” – The Killer

    Hitmen in action, drama, and thriller films are nearly universally cold, calculating, and precise. Elite. But The Killer embraces a subversive take on the trope. Despite concerted effort to be otherwise, the contract killer in the spotlight of this story is (at least at this point in his tale) human, messy, pretentiously pseudo-intellectual, and error-prone. This elevates what would otherwise be a straightforward revenge thriller dripping with David Fincher’s dark signature style into a more engrossing character piece. Subversion is a consistent theme throughout the film, especially so in the film’s minutia moreso than its broader structure, making the ride along that mostly standard revenge movie layout (a mix of equally lengthy action scenes and dialogues from the key players tied together with suspense of when and how the proverbial trigger will be pulled) more engaging than it otherwise would be, in providing a lot of unexpected timings, much of its humor, and an ending certainly interesting.

    From The Killer‘s first frame, you immediately know you’re watching a David Fincher flick, with its hyper-stylized collage of details and titles set to a pulsing, dark, electronic score crafted by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. Which moves straight into the director’s trademark sleek, rich moodiness. Even throws a voice-over reminiscent of Fight Club in for good measure. The work of long-time collaborators cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt, who paired with Fincher on Gone Girl, Mindhunter, and Mank, and editor Kirk Baxter, who paired with Fincher on five films including The Social Network, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, amplifies this familiarity. As is expected with a Fincher project, production across the board is immaculate, the only negative standout some periodic shaky cam meant to convey the stress level of our protagonist taken to comically excessive levels. With a cast made up of the likes of Michael Fassbender and Tilda Swinton it goes without saying the acting performances leave little to be desired. There are no particular weak points among the cast. The screenplay by Andrew Kevin Walker (Se7en, 8mm, Sleepy Hollow), adapted from the titular French graphic novel series, is tight and workmanlike, but interspersed with peculiarities, like a particularly memorable anecdote involving a bear and sodomy. (You read that right.) Altogether the writing is serviceable but feels perhaps a bit carried by Fincher’s bold style and the consistent effectiveness of the overall production.

    Just like a hitman, consistency is the name of the game with The Killer. Much is consistently good, and nothing is consistently bad. One could argue the project as a whole, despite being a somewhat unique take on it in many aspects, is ultimately just a glorified revenge film and disappointingly unambitious for a Fincher project. And I’d have little disagreement with that assessment. Don’t go into this film expecting direct, grand, meta (no pun intended shortly) posturings like you get with The Social Network or Fight Club. The Killer is decidedly a focused character piece, but of a character grounded in the same broad world of power players and top-down exploitation we all inhabit, so there is intellectual meat to chew on; you just have to mostly chew it on your own. Even if you’re only looking for a tense, moderately-paced, action thriller with far-above-par production, The Killer is worth a hit.

    Score:

    4 / 5

    Spread word or, if you can afford to, click this banner to donate a couple bucks toward making my dream of consistent, uncompromised creation a financially feasible reality!

  • The Undervaluing of Rich Inner Worlds Shared

    Many First World people think a “better life” only comes from material conditions because they have no perspective of anything different socially than a vacuous and shallow preoccupation with said conditions, which is everywhere around them at all times and drives the vast majority of their actions. With that as their basis for what thought and communication is, it is no wonder they place little value in those things.

    But our thoughts and communications alone not only have the power to transform any situation but define what every situation is in the first place. Only those who have gotten a taste of and glimpsed the life-changing potential of rich inner worlds driven by empathy, compassion, logic, and deep, probing honesty mutually shared come to understand the very real difference our words, inside and out, can make on every single moment we’re alive.

    But as it is broadly, too few people value these things, else thinkers, philosophers, poets, and artists wouldn’t over and over again through history languish in some mix of poverty and suffering, only mined of their wisdom in retrospect, posthumously.

  • Quick Review: The Fall of the House of Usher

    Just finished watching the eight-episode miniseries The Fall of the House of Usher from Mike Flanagan, creator of other popular horror-themed television shows such as The Haunting of Hill House and Midnight Mass. Here are my thoughts on it.

    As an interconnected piece of an overarching frame story on the fate of the titular Ushers as a whole (an extremely affluent, powerful, corrupt, and complicated American crime family), most episodes deal in the individual tragedy of a particular member of that family, each of those episodes additionally loosely based on one of the many classic horror tales of Edgar Allen Poe. The setup is incredibly compelling. Pulling such a complex premise made of disparate parts into a single cohesive work takes a good deal of intelligent architecting across multiple interconnected storylines and not insignificant literary knowledge (since much of it is based around Poe’s works). And Mike Flannigan’s crew mostly succeeds in this task, but every episode does not hit to the same standard in regards to the writing.

    Visually, yes, and this makes sense as Flannigan himself directed every episode. The show is extremely consistent in its visual tone: each carefully-constructed shot is exquisitely rich with dark, brooding, Gothic atmosphere or (very often and, in the hybrid sense) modern sleekness. This hybrid tone permeates. In fact, I feel the show is too consistent, and ultimately stiff, when it comes to its horror elements. Most scares–and there are jump scares–are rendered relatively ineffective. Horror elements especially repetitious in pattern even begin to come across somewhat lazy as the episodes go on, not emotionally matching the dramatic sound cues accompanying. But consistent, and consistently high quality, the visual production (and sound design, I might add) certainly is.

    The writing, again, not so much. None of it is terrible, although sometimes you can feel the voice of a single writer in dialogues rather than conversations feeling as different characters are speaking to one another each from their own head-spaces. This is exceedingly common in movies and TV, especially in talky scenes lacking any action. Drives me up a wall when I am presented a collection of characters merely cliches/stereotypes, that then all speak and act quickly and together as though driven by a singular motor toward the one purpose the writer has for this exchange of dialogue, with their individual cliche/stereotypical traits the only differentiation between the characters, like different flavor packets. Much of the writing is very good: cynically, satirically biting at various aspects of American culture and the “Elites” that run the show through all manner of malfeasance, perversion, and corruption. This is handled a bit comically heavy-handed and cliched in parts, but it’s dealt with quite similarly to Eric Kripe’s The Boys, at least somewhat self-aware of the over-exaggeration of its satire. And so it comes across, in the end, as… clever. Sometimes the writing is deathly serious, and other times–often in the same scene–supremely goofy. And all of this works quite well to keep things on the whole fairly engaging.

    But, because you can put together very early on during an episode, how it is going to fall neatly into place within the established pattern of how each of this show’s episodes go… and never do any surprise… a lot of interesting potential, especially in regards to mystery, is squandered. Each episode becomes solely about how interesting the characters and dialogue is in going through the same tragic, downward spiral motions; how hard the important bits hit; and whether it drags or not. And some episodes are just weaker than others in all these regards. Final nitpick: there’s some serious believability lapses in the behavior of a few characters as the series progresses. A decent mix of careful nuance and hamfisted heavy-handedness, the writing driving the story is of high caliber but not without significant flaw, which is common in television with many writers, but even in overall conception in regards to the repetitive episode framework.

    Speaking of mystery, therein lies the show’s biggest flaw in my eyes. A certain degree of predictability might be expected, seeing as the show is primarily based around well-known works of the 19th Century, but even when the show is trying to be mysterious, nothing in even a single episode, even when fully dressed by stingers and all to support, comes as a surprise. Sure, the title of the show kind of gives it away, and from the start it’s mostly told in flashback so the audience is asking, “How did we get here?” But, as an example, there’s one major twist in the whooole shebang, and they spoil this by revealing beforehand the character is going to do it.

    All in all, The Fall of the House of Usher is well worth your time, especially if you think you’d dig a brooding drama about the rich and powerful becoming systematically undone that culminates time-and-time again in a myriad of outlandishly horrific ways.

    Spread word or, if you can afford to, click this banner to donate a couple bucks toward making my dream of consistent, uncompromised creation a financially feasible reality!

  • Truth, Bubbles, and The American Way

    We are each a tiny piece of the supremely complex machine of existence, most of which is likely to remain a mystery to us for the foreseeable future. And so, from our extremely limited perspectives within this massively complicated matrix of mysteries and the push-pull of unknown factors beyond our comprehension, our lives are destined to feel in relative chaos lest we take shelter in some protective bubble. Often I have found that the bubbles provided out-of-the-box of our birth are unfortunately (from the perspective of my current bubble at least) composed largely of illusion and delusion that frame this chaotic perspective as something else more mentally manageable. As something that feels agreeable by way of generations of social initiation, nostalgia, and other particularly emotional rather than logical connections. But even those committed to a life lived boldly true must shore themselves up within some bubble of “as far as I know” sense or risk becoming a lone, vulnerable leaf torn apart by the violent winds of “chaos,” which again, is not actually chaos but some conglomeration of factors too big for us to even get full visage of, let alone control.

    So, come right this way. We have many models of mental shelters and bubbles available. Some like glass or clear plastic: weak but with a clear view of the outside. Some like brick or metal: much stronger, but offering zero perspective of anything but the minutia of the inhabitant’s small world. We could install a window or two for the latter if an Allegory-of-the-Cave-kinda experience is what you’re after. Most of us exist on a spectrum between these two extremes (generally closer to the latter), so we’ve likely seen others in their bubble from our own (and judged them and their bubble, of course). We’ve seen the soap bubble occupier in a perpetual state of being either confused or completely lost as they move from one volatile circumstance to another whenever their latest temporary bubble breaks like so many before under the teensiest pressures of reality. And we’ve seen the iron bubble occupier, so preoccupied with their own inane life and rules that they’re completely oblivious to anything outside that context. So… made up your mind? No pun intended. Keep in mind: there’s no warranties. Our bubbles burst too regularly for that, but we have many, many suitable replacements ready (even of the lemons that are guaranteed to break from the sneeze of only one of God’s nostrils). And we’re always coming up with new bubbles to try out when the old ones our ancestors used don’t work so well no more. Also, it’s not that big of a deal, but before you make your final decision, keep in mind that many throughout history have died for their choice of bubble.

    Kidding aside, I believe shoring oneself up to thrive as well as one can despite any eventualities that could arise in the relative chaos of ours lives is paramount to both living a life worth the limited energy we’re allotted at birth and surviving it true of heart within a bubble of composed of as little illusion and/or delusion as possible. Which means… at the very least… looking at the most significant things in our lives (actions, histories, routines, habits, people, places, values, et al.) from as many perspectives as possible. Both from in and out of our current value system. In the full, fantastical scope of possibilities: past, present, and future. If this happens; or this; or you do this; or this comes out of nowhere. From the perspective of a life subjectively better; and worse; and just different. From the perspective of others both close and intimate to us and far and away.

    Though we likely cannot, and maybe will never, see the absolute truth, the broader the scope of introspection, the more we can assure ourselves we are moving towards it simply because we are moving ever away from falsehoods.

    This doesn’t mean worrying. Rather, it means, when the circumstances of life change for whatever reason–and they will in all but the most socially protected of bubbles–one has already dealt with and processed all the possibilities and their negative effects. So this process of broad and deep introspection frees one of worry, at least as far as we can humanly achieve. Because there’s nothing we humans fear more than the unknown. Even if we are enticed toward something completely opposite of who we are for whatever reason, change generally happens over time in steps. Seen in captures of skipped time, how one has moved from one place to another might often be shocking. (This is basis of much art and entertainment.) But over the normal, moment-to-moment passage of time, even the most grand of changes is unnoticed for how incremental it is. This is true of both individuals and organizations, from families to nations to humanity as a whole.

    Those necessary alternate perspectives, which collectively generate wisdom that can persist outside of our individual bubbles, can be shared/taught, as they are through a good book or movie, but even the most comprehensive work will always pale in comparison to the full, uncontextualized experience of life lived oneself. Especially that of life lived with a mindset of broad introspection. But even so, we are creatures bound by the here-and-now, so that which we share socially (via whatever language or medium), allowing access to perspectives otherwise difficult or impossible to experience (albeit with the understanding they will all be to varying levels of limited and biased) is just as vitally important as getting out there and living ourselves.

    And it’s important to know experience alone isn’t wisdom. Just because we learned something from an event (whether it be conscious, as in a statement we can tell ourselves, or unconscious, as in an instinctive reaction) doesn’t mean we learned something worthwhile that we should pass on as wisdom. In fact, funnily enough because of our regular lack of introspective preparation, we very often learn the opposite of what’s worthwhile by sudden force of need, developing unhealthy coping mechanisms, going on to socially distribute disinformation based on limited perspective, and so on. We shouldn’t consider an event fully understood, and act/live upon it, until we’ve looked at it through through a test of more broadly-evaluated introspection.

    If you do such broad and deep introspection enough, it inevitably becomes an important part of your personality due to how powerful it is as a habit. But learning to be comfortable in the state of virtuous uncertainty that comes with in a world largely incompatible with any form of doubt–by nature of our cultures being designed principally by those who have ruled from extremely dense, blind, and protected bubbles–is an even more difficult skill. Most will simply choose to live out their life in the most comfortable bubble near to that of the bubbles they spent considerable time in and around in their youth, and that’s that.

    Spread word or, if you can afford to, click this banner to donate a couple bucks toward making my dream of consistent, uncompromised creation a financially feasible reality!

Privacy Policy