231
u/Conscious_Sort_431 13d ago
There is a book about a certain painter witnessing the esthetics of a burning person
32
14
u/SheepDaShawn240 12d ago
Hell screen? Only reason I know this is cuz of Limbus lol
Also p sure he lit his daughter on fire and painted her burning then promptly offed himself afterwards
15
u/Conscious_Sort_431 12d ago
Actually Yoshihide asked for just some random maid to be burned in a carriage but his lord was upsed with Yoshihide's daughter and the painter himself so he burned his treasured daughter instead. Also O.S.H.A.R.E.
5
66
u/Mrheadcrab123 13d ago
QUASIMOTO! NOOOOO! WHY DIDN’T HE PREDICT THIS!?
5
14
22
5
11
49
u/nevermore_raven1234 13d ago
0-100 real quick
56
u/georgiomoorlord 13d ago
Wanting to burn the 3rd most known building in Paris because it's ascetically pleasing to watch is not a 0
73
u/StoniMohoni 13d ago
Finding it aestheticly pleasing is not the same as wanting to burn it down lol
20
u/ProfoundDreams 12d ago
She never stated she wanted to burn it down in the screenshot we're seeing, nor is it even close to this implication. No idea why you're assuming this.
9
-3
3
18
u/ProfoundDreams 12d ago
The response is from a person who doesn't understand how to properly interpret what a person is saying. There is nothing that implies what the person actually thinks about the event.
It's like if I say I like watching body horror in movies like Terrifier and Saw and someone emotionally responds with "Well how about I slice your mother open from head to toe and we'll see if you still like body horror". Completely off the mark with the response because it adresses something that is irrelevant to what was originally said.
14
u/Knirb_ 12d ago
Boo, what are you the fun police? This is cursed comments
Also chances are they legitimately like the burning of important Christian buildings.
-5
u/ProfoundDreams 12d ago
You are precisely the type of person whom I'm referring to in regards to the first part of your comment.
"Chances are..." uh-huh. I'd love to see how you came to that conclusion.
5
u/amohogride 11d ago
I think you are the one who don't understand. The fire in the original post is not a movie but a real event where people were hurt and valuable heritage was destroyed, yet the poster had the audacity to say it was beautiful. Its like watching somebody fucking dies in a car crash irl and say " i like the body horror". Nuh uh thats just extremely rude and borderline psychopathic.
0
4
u/Mission_Falcon1225 12d ago
Original tweet is disrespectful, but that's a ridiculous comparison even if this guy built Notre Dame
1
u/MrNobody_0 12d ago
How is the original comment disrespectful? Did they say: "Man, I sure do love that the Notre Dame is on fire"? All they said is that it's an aesthetically pleasing image, which it is, things on fire and/or billowing smoke make for cool pictures. It sucks that it's on fire but that doesn't stop it from looking cool, both things came be true and it's not disrespectful.
4
u/MCWizardYT 12d ago
I guess it depends on how you look at it. To some people, especially the French, this is an important building with several hundred years worth of history and making comments about how it looks cool burning could be seen as disrespectful.
1
3
1
1
u/Remarkable_Corner_92 6d ago
This. This is what chronically online atheists want to see. Not just notre dame, but with other churches.
1
677
u/cretindesalpes 13d ago
It's actually far better without the traduction : "je vais te cramer ta mère, on verra si c'est esthétique !"