Hello, hello! I'm a 0.01% doodler and 99.9% lazy butt. You're probably here because of that Destiel comic--if you want to see more like that don't hesitate to message my inbox and I'll draw it! ;w; (Art tag listed below.)
Smart people have all kinds of delicious stuff in their heads! Well, now you can eat it. You can get Edgar Allan Poe, William Shakespeare or Sigmund Freud candy in a book-shaped package. Each wrapper has the face of the genius on it. Shakespeare tastes like lemon, Poe is grape and for some mysterious reason Freud reminded us of bananas. Food for thinkers! Looks great on a bookshelf.
Anonymous Oh my god, that gif of hannah and cas in the car with cas driving reminds me so much of dean and cas's car scenes:'-( Cas is taking Dean's place and Hannah is taking Cas's as far as roles this season. Exciting! I'm thinking this either going to end with Hannah dying for Cas (giving her grace to him or something like that) or Cas telling Hannah he can't go with them to heaven, that he wants to stay with dean on earth, and she'll be the one to lead the angels and heaven.
Definitely, and I’m sure we’ll see more of that parallel. If Cas/Hannah is meant to push Cas into realizing his feelings for Dean, then having Hannah parallel Cas is crucial for that understanding. If Cas can see himself in Hannah, then he’ll have to wonder who it is that he’s pining after. Plus, it’ll be yet another instance of Dean and Cas’ arcs paralleling, which is just fantastic because it puts them on equal ground.
As for Hannah’s fate, I think you’re right- although I’m really, really hoping it’s the second option. Not only would that allow TPTB to resolve some of the conflict with the angels, but it would also be a fitting end to Hannah’s arc: if in the course of this season she learns to appreciate humanity the way angels were always supposed to, then she will be the perfect leader for Heaven, because she’s already on the road to understanding what it means to have free will. Also, I really hope it’s not the first option, because it would be yet another dead female angel, and all for the sake of a love interest, which is problematic on a couple of different levels.
Thus the myth of the knight lumbering around like Frankenstein is busted
This myth bugs me to no end, so let me clear it up here and now:
A made-to-measure suit of full plate armour is (and ergo was) less cumbersome to wear than, say, an ill-fitting all-weather coat. It was expensive as heck, but the movement it afforded was surprisingly non-restrictive. Also remember that the men who wore these suits were usually quite physically fit (medieval knights- who were among the few who could afford the armour - were trained to fight from around 6 years-old), and were accustomed to training while wearing them.
Plate armour was moderately heavy, granted, but the weight was optimally distributed over the body, meaning the mostly costly aspect of wearing it was increased fatigue. It’s not heavy in the same way a hiking backpack is heavy. Any accounts of a knight being unable to rise after being knocked down were most likely because he was injured, dehydrated, or just plain exhausted - all of which being common in battle anyway. Regardless, it’s unlikely that it’s because his armour prevented him from moving… and the fallacy of knights requiring cranes to get onto their horses is just stupid.
The idea that full plate was sooo impractical is ludicrous; if it were, people wouldn’t have bothered with it.
"But plate armor is increadibly heavyyyy! Only giant musclemen can even move in iiiit! It’s completely useless against agile unarmored foooooes! Women can’t even put it oooon, its sole weight will nail them in one placeeee!"
If it’s not “the distraction factor" that people use to try to justify ridiculous female armor, it’s "agility".
Partially this myth survives I think because like Dungeons and Dragons always insist on selling up the idea that heavier armors come with heavier agility penalties. And to a certain extent, there are certain activities I wouldn’t expect to be able to do while wearing plate armor.
Rock climbing without tools or ropes
High diving and synchronized swimming
Dancing en pointe
Okay I don’t do any of those things but you get the point.
Practical armor is made to allow at least a fair amount of agility for it’s wearer for a simple reason: The best defense is not to be in the way of the attack, that way you don’t suffer any of the impact.
Or to put it a simpler way: Lots of safety gear is uncomfortable and encumbering, but was the last time you heard someone propose that workers should just go without - that way if there’s an accident they’ll be able to get out of the way quicker?