Olympics Opening Ceremony

[Anonymous]

Rumor has it that Disney has recruited most of the cast members from the Last Supper parody to be Jedi knights in Season 2 of the Acolyte.

[Anonymous]

The Olympic Committee apologized if people were offended but they never said it wasn’t a representation of the last supper. Wouldn’t that have been the right time to clarify if it was the depiction of the baccanal instead?

[Anonymous]

I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

[Anonymous]

What a load of rubbish.

[Anonymous]

I won’t hold my breath for the LA Olympics opening ceremony that mocks drag queens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

France is usually alone in that brash secular approach, even in the western world, but that is how it is.

The French have a rich history in recent times of deliberately mocking religion in a brash and brazen way. The difference here is that unlike the Charlie Hedbo cartoons which inflamed Muslim extremists and resulted in the deaths of many, mocking Christians will only result in a little social media outrage.

The French are oh so brave . . . LOL!

They are just different than us , and have national pride, which is absolutely fine.

Stop making this some type of culture war!

[Anonymous]

France: Mocking Christianity since 1789.

[Anonymous]

Don’t the persecuted Christians have something else to do on a Sunday (the lords day)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

What are you going on about? Nobody reading this diatribe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Replying to your own post?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Replying to your own post?

Well, no one else made it all the way through

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I for one loved this opening ceremony. It was so artistic and avant garde. I loved that the entire city of Paris was the stage and the participant. I loved all the historical, cultural, artistic and literally references.

My favorite part was the masked torchbearer going to the Louvre to find all the paintings gone and they’re at the windows trying to watch the Olympics!

I also loved the Liberty section with the beheaded Marie Antoinette singing followed by a rock and opera mix.

Incredible!! Mind blown! I adore the French!

Beautifully done.

The concept of the production was certainly a bit high brow for the average American who may not be as well versed in French history, art or culture. I was thrilled by all the references and even I mistook the assassins creed reference to Man in the Iron Mask or Count of Monte Cristo.

Could you be more patronizing and condescending?

- American who’s lived in France, speaks French, and loves France in general, but was sorely disappointed by the OC and will not watch a minute of the Olympics this year

You won't watch the olympics because you didn't like the opening ceremonies? That's just stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Replying to your own post?

Lmao - nobody but the pp is reading that thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Thanks! But I just pasted it, lol