Meme Categories:
Category: Language
First Seen:
2024-09-01T22:33:52.385533+00:00
Gemma-3-27b's Take:
Okay, let's break down this *Game of Thrones*-themed meme using the lenses you've requested. Given the content, some sections won't apply (or be very stretched), but I’ll address them where possible. ## Visual Description The meme consists of four screenshots taken from a scene involving Tyrion Lannister and a woman holding a baby. The scenes are presented in a comic strip format. Tyrion is speaking to the woman in each frame. The progression of imagery and text builds a joke centered around a misinterpretation arising from language barriers. * **Frame 1:** Tyrion, looking concerned, says “For your baby.” * **Frame 2:** Tyrion touches his chin thoughtfully, and says “To eat.” * **Frame 3:** The woman looks horrified and clutches her baby tightly. * **Frame 4:** Close-up on Tyrion and the woman, with the text "She thinks you want to eat her baby." The humor derives from the ambiguity created by a potentially flawed translation or a beginner's linguistic error. ## Foucauldian Genealogical Discourse Analysis This meme subtly touches upon the power dynamics inherent in language and communication. Foucault's work explored how discourse constructs knowledge and power. Here, the meme illustrates how a misinterpretation (likely stemming from imperfect language acquisition) immediately positions the "speaker" (Tyrion, representing the language learner) as potentially dangerous or monstrous. The misunderstanding doesn’t just involve a linguistic error; it generates a specific “truth” in the woman’s mind – a truth that accuses the speaker of cannibalism. This ‘truth’ is not inherent in the words themselves but is *constructed* through the interaction and the societal taboos surrounding harming children. The meme implicitly questions *how* language is used to define and categorize individuals and behaviors, and how quickly judgments (and fear) can arise from miscommunication. The genealogy of this fear could be traced to deeply held cultural prohibitions around infanticide or cannibalism. ## Critical Theory Critical theory, focusing on power structures and social domination, can be applied to this meme. The situation highlights the implicit power imbalance when someone attempts communication across a language barrier. The native speaker (the woman) holds the immediate interpretive power. The learner (Tyrion) is vulnerable to misinterpretation and judged through the lens of the native speaker's assumptions. The meme reveals how even seemingly innocuous phrases can be distorted and weaponized by those in positions of linguistic dominance. It can be seen as a microcosm of broader issues of cultural imperialism and the silencing of voices due to linguistic barriers. The woman *assumes* intent based on her own framework, thus enacting a form of dominance through interpretation. ## Marxist Conflict Theory Applying Marxist conflict theory to this meme is a bit of a stretch, but we can attempt it. The "conflict" is framed around a communication breakdown, and one could interpret this as a symbolic representation of class or cultural conflict. The language learner (Tyrion) could be seen as representing a group attempting to access a space (communication, culture) dominated by another group (the native speaker). The misunderstanding acts as a barrier to this access and reinforces existing power dynamics. The woman's reaction could be seen as a defense of her cultural boundaries. However, this is a rather tenuous application of Marxist theory. ## Postmodernism The meme embodies several key tenets of postmodernism. It highlights the instability of meaning and the subjective nature of interpretation. There is no "true" meaning of Tyrion's statement; it's entirely dependent on the receiver's understanding and cultural context. The meme also playfully deconstructs the idea of clear communication. The assumption that language can perfectly convey intent is undermined. The ambiguity is not a flaw but a feature of language itself. The humor relies on this breakdown of fixed meanings and the absurdity of misinterpretation. The meme suggests that "truth" is always mediated and never absolute. ## Queer Feminist Intersectional Analysis Applying a queer feminist intersectional lens is challenging. However, we can explore the power dynamics at play. The meme, while not explicitly gendered or focused on sexual orientation, highlights a situation of vulnerability. The language learner is placed in a position of being misunderstood and potentially judged (and even feared). This vulnerability could be extended as a metaphor for marginalized groups who are constantly subjected to misinterpretation and negative stereotyping due to cultural or linguistic barriers. The woman's immediate assumption of malice, while fueled by the language gap, reflects a broader pattern of societal biases and the tendency to view "otherness" with suspicion. It’s a moment where the speaker, lacking the power to adequately explain, becomes vulnerable to the interpretations imposed upon them, echoing how marginalized groups often experience misrepresentation and the imposition of harmful narratives. Let me know if you'd like me to elaborate on any of these sections or explore other theoretical frameworks!
Llama-3.2-11b's Take:
This meme is a humorous take on the popular language learning app Duolingo. It shows a character from the TV show Game of Thrones, Tyrion Lannister, struggling to learn a new language. The text at the top of the meme reads "When you finally master Duolingo and try to talk to a native speaker", and the image below shows Tyrion trying to speak to a woman, with the caption "For your baby. To eat. She thinks you want to eat her baby."
First Seen:
2024-06-05T03:59:11.359256+00:00
Gemma-3-27b's Take:
Okay, let's break down this comic strip using the requested theoretical lenses. Given the simplicity of the image, not all sections will be robust – some will be brief or indicate the framework isn't strongly applicable. --- ## Visual Description The comic is a simple two-panel cartoon. It features a cartoon Roman soldier, fully clad in traditional armor including a helmet with a red plume. The style is minimalist and deliberately "stick figure-esque," emphasizing basic shapes and outlines. * **Panel 1:** The soldier stands facing forward, and a speech bubble emanating from him states, "Heh." The background is a beige, rough-textured brick wall. * **Panel 2:** The same soldier is now looking at a wall with the Roman numeral "LIX" carved or etched into it. His speech bubble now says, “Nice.” The setting and wall texture remain the same. The numeral is prominently displayed and slightly off-center. The bottom of the frame has a very small watermark “@my_yarns” The overall aesthetic is intentionally rudimentary and amusing, relying on contrast between the traditionally stoic Roman image and the banal, simple delivery of the punchline. --- ## Foucauldian Genealogical Discourse Analysis This cartoon, while simple, offers a fascinating entry point for a Foucault-inspired analysis. * **Discourse of Roman Military/Authority:** The image invokes a discourse of Roman military might, discipline, and control. The armor *signifies* this. However, the discourse is *subverted* by the soldier’s ridiculous expression and utter triviality of his speech ("Heh," "Nice”). He doesn't appear to be performing his function or exhibiting traits associated with the discourse. * **Genealogy of "Nice":** Tracing the historical meaning of “Nice” can reveal how its current usage as a casual acknowledgment of something visually appealing differs from its origins. The casual use of "nice" applied to an ancient numeral is a modern linguistic evolution, effectively *re-writing* the history of how we assign value and meaning. The image hints at how language itself is a historical construct, reshaped by power dynamics (even if seemingly benign in this case). * **Power/Knowledge:** The numeral "LIX" represents the number 59. The soldier appears to *know* that it is a numeral. This seemingly innocuous act of recognition subtly reasserts a power dynamic rooted in knowledge. Those who can read and interpret Roman numerals, even in a comical context, hold a degree of power over those who cannot. * **The “self” as constructed:** The soldier does not *become* a Roman soldier through a natural process. He is *made* a Roman soldier through training, armor, and the expectation to adhere to a certain ideal. His "Heh" and “Nice” break from this. --- ## Critical Theory (Frankfurt School) The image, viewed through a Critical Theory lens, presents a subtle commentary on the loss of ‘aura’ and the commodification of culture. * **Loss of Aura:** Walter Benjamin's concept of the "aura" of an artwork—its unique presence in time and space—is applicable. The Roman numeral, traditionally imbued with historical and cultural significance, is *stripped* of its aura by being reduced to a subject of casual, banal appreciation. The soldier’s “Nice” underscores this flattening effect. * **Culture Industry:** While not a direct example of mass-produced culture, the image *parodies* the way culture is often reduced to superficial consumption. We've been trained to react to visually interesting things with automatic affirmation (“Nice”). The image is a commentary on our superficial engagement with “meaningful” history. * **Instrumental Reason:** The soldier's statement is a purely *instrumental* act—a response to a visual stimulus. There’s no deeper meaning or engagement. This reflects a broader critique of modern rationality, where everything is assessed based on its usefulness, and intrinsic value is lost. --- ## Marxist Conflict Theory While a strong Marxist reading is difficult to achieve given the cartoon's simplicity, some connections can be drawn. * **Ideology:** The Roman Empire represented a specific class structure and worldview. The cartoon could be seen as subtly subverting that ideology. The soldier's disconnect from the 'proper' Roman persona suggests a rebellion against the established order. * **Alienation:** The soldier could be seen as alienated from his role and identity. His banal reaction suggests a disconnect from the historical weight and power associated with his position. He’s a cog in a machine who’s lost the will to perform his function. * **Historical Materialism:** The image evokes a bygone era of conquest and power. By reducing this context to a trivial exchange, the cartoon subtly highlights the impermanence of power structures and the inevitable shift in material conditions. --- ## Postmodernism The cartoon is strongly aligned with postmodern sensibilities. * **Pastiche/Intertextuality:** The image is a pastiche – a playful imitation – of Roman imagery. It combines elements of history with contemporary slang ("Heh," "Nice") in an ironic way. * **Deconstruction:** The cartoon deconstructs the traditional Roman soldier archetype. By pairing the imposing armor with such a ridiculous and simple response, it challenges our preconceived notions of authority and seriousness. * **Simulation/Hyperreality:** The numeral "LIX" is a *sign* of a number. It's not the number itself. The cartoon plays with this distinction, reducing the sign to a superficial aesthetic object. The “Nice” confirms its status as hyperreality—a simulation devoid of authentic meaning. * **Rejection of Grand Narratives:** The cartoon doesn’t tell a story or offer a grand moral lesson. It is a deliberately fragmented and self-aware piece of commentary. --- ## Queer Feminist Intersectional Analysis This framework is the least directly applicable but can still offer some interesting readings. * **Subversion of Masculinity:** The Roman soldier is a traditional symbol of hypermasculinity. The cartoon subverts this by presenting a soldier who is emotionally flat and expresses approval in a vapid way. This disrupts the expectation of stoic strength. * **Performance of Identity:** The soldier is *performing* a role (being a Roman soldier), but his behavior doesn’t align with the expected performance. This can be seen as a rejection of rigid gender roles and expectations. * **Power dynamics:** Even within the Roman army, there were complex power dynamics related to class, status, and potentially sexuality. While the cartoon doesn't directly address these, it hints at the constructed nature of identity and the possibility of challenging established norms. * **Aesthetic Appreciation as a "Safe" Space:** The “Nice” is a safe, superficial appreciation. It doesn't *interrogate* the power dynamics of the Roman empire, nor does it challenge its historical significance. It simply acknowledges it from a comfortable distance. --- I hope this detailed breakdown is helpful. It’s important to remember that these are interpretive frameworks, and different readings are possible.
Llama-3.2-11b's Take:
This meme is a play on the ancient Roman greeting "Salve!" which was used to greet someone in a formal or official setting. The meme features a Roman soldier saying "Salve!" but responding to a greeting with "Nice" and a Roman soldier saying "Salve!" but responding with "LXIX" (which is a Roman numeral for 69).
First Seen:
2024-02-29T21:50:52.988388+00:00
Gemma-3-27b's Take:
Okay, let's break down this meme through several theoretical lenses. **Visual Description** The image is a formal portrait of King Edward VII, likely a painted reproduction of a traditional royal portrait. He is depicted in full regalia, including a crimson coat adorned with gold trim, a heavily decorated sash, numerous medals, and an elaborate, ornate crown. He is seated, posed with one hand resting on a highly embellished throne or chair and the other holding a staff or scepter. The background is a dark, rich red, and the overall effect is one of extreme wealth, authority, and power. The meme text above the image reads, "When you say 'perhaps' instead of 'maybe.'" The juxtaposition of the elaborate imagery with the trivial text is central to the meme's humor. --- **Foucauldian Genealogical Discourse Analysis** This meme operates precisely *because* of the historical construction of language and social meaning. Focusing on the difference between “perhaps” and “maybe,” we can trace a genealogy of how these words have become associated with specific social positions and performative acts. * **Discourse & Power:** The use of "perhaps" carries an air of aristocratic detachment and aristocratic politeness, the very qualities exhibited by the King in the image. This is in stark contrast to the more common and direct "maybe." Historically, these subtle linguistic choices served to mark class differences and reinforce social hierarchies. The choice between the two is not merely semantic, it's a performance of social power and the display of elevated social capital. * **Archaeology of Knowledge:** Foucault would ask: How did the meaning of “perhaps” become associated with a more refined, upper-class speech? Tracing the historical usage of these words would reveal how they became imbued with connotations of sophistication and distance. * **Power/Knowledge:** The meme implies that choosing "perhaps" is an act of asserting social status. It's not simply about being polite; it's about enacting a performance of privilege. The King, as an embodiment of inherited power, *is* the exemplar of this language. --- **Critical Theory (Frankfurt School)** The meme taps into a familiar trope of Critical Theory – the critique of *culture industry* and the ways in which even seemingly trivial things can be vehicles for the reproduction of dominant ideologies. * **Culture Industry:** The meme can be seen as a commentary on how even everyday language choices can become associated with status and class. It’s a small instance of how culture is used to reinforce social hierarchies. * **Reification:** The meme points to the reification of class distinctions. The King isn’t merely a person; he’s a symbol of an entire system of power. By associating "perhaps" with this symbol, the meme highlights how language can become fetishized and divorced from its actual communicative function. * **Commodification of Language:** The meme subtly points to how even language can become a commodity, a marker of social status that can be “purchased” through education, upbringing, and performance. --- **Postmodernism** The meme embodies several core tenets of Postmodern thought: * **Hyperreality & Simulacra:** The meme doesn’t deal with the “real” meaning of “perhaps” or “maybe.” It deals with the *image* of a certain way of speaking and its association with an exaggerated symbol of authority. The King is a symbol of power, and "perhaps" becomes a symbol *of* the symbol – a hyperreal construct. * **Deconstruction:** The meme deconstructs the seemingly innocuous act of choosing one word over another. It reveals how even these seemingly small choices can be loaded with cultural and historical meaning. * **Playfulness & Irony:** The meme’s humor stems from the ironic juxtaposition of high and low culture – the regal portrait and the trivial text. This playfulness is a characteristic feature of Postmodern art and thought. --- **Marxist Conflict Theory** While not immediately obvious, a Marxist reading can be applied: * **Class Struggle:** The meme implicitly references the ongoing class struggle. The King, representing the ruling class, embodies a particular way of speaking that reinforces his position of power. Choosing "perhaps" over "maybe" is a subtle act of asserting dominance. * **Ideology:** The meme exposes how ideology operates through everyday language. The seemingly harmless choice of words becomes a vehicle for the perpetuation of class distinctions and the naturalization of hierarchy. * **False Consciousness:** The meme could be interpreted as a critique of how individuals might unconsciously adopt the language and mannerisms of the ruling class, thereby reinforcing their own subordination. **Important Note:** These are interpretations, and a single meme can be analyzed from multiple perspectives. The richness of the meme lies in its ability to evoke these diverse theoretical frameworks.
Llama-3.2-11b's Take:
This meme is a humorous image of a regal-looking king, likely from a historical or fictional context, with a caption that pokes fun at the phrase "I was going to say...". The text at the top reads, "When you're about to say 'I was going to say...' but you remember you're a king and you have to say 'I was going to say... perhaps'".
First Seen:
2023-05-26T19:44:36+00:00
Gemma-3-27b's Take:
Okay, let's break down this image and the accompanying text through the requested critical lenses. **Visual Description** The image depicts the skeletal remains of a cave bear (likely *Ursus spelaeus*) lying on a reddish-brown substrate, probably cave sediment. The skeleton is largely articulated, though somewhat fragmented, suggesting a relatively complete specimen, or one that was excavated and partially reassembled. The background is indistinct, highlighting the skeleton as the primary focal point. The lighting is warm, giving the scene an aged, earthy quality. The positioning of the skeleton suggests a natural death within the cave environment, though context (excavation, display) is missing. **Foucauldian Genealogical Discourse Analysis** The initial question, "wonder why it's called that," initiates a genealogical investigation. The response that the naming of Romania is tied to the presence of Romans, exposes how knowledge and naming conventions are constructed through power dynamics. * **Discourse & Power:** The naming of geographical locations and species isn’t neutral; it reflects the historical power structures that defined knowledge and legitimized certain narratives. In this case, the legacy of the Roman Empire imposed its nomenclature on the land, influencing how it's understood and classified today. The "truth" of the name Romania is a product of historical power, not inherent meaning. * **Archaeology as Discourse:** The very act of excavating, classifying, and displaying this bear skeleton is itself a discourse. It is how we, as modern individuals, construct meaning around the past. The skeleton, as an artifact, is not merely a biological remnant, but a text that is read and interpreted through the lens of contemporary knowledge and values. * **Genealogy:** The user traces the name “Romania” back to the Romans, revealing its historical roots. This “digging” into the past (genealogy) highlights how present-day concepts and practices are shaped by historical events and power relations. **Critical Theory** The image and commentary subtly touch upon themes resonant within Critical Theory, particularly regarding the construction of "nature" and its relationship to human history. * **Nature as Constructed:** The skeleton represents “nature,” but its discovery, excavation, and representation (in this image) are all human acts. This demonstrates that our understanding of “nature” is never purely objective. It is always mediated through our cultural and historical lenses. * **The Past & Present:** The comment connecting the bear skeleton to Romania’s Roman past highlights the ongoing interplay between past and present. The past isn’t simply gone; it continues to shape our present realities, including our landscapes, naming conventions, and cultural identities. * **Reification:** The display of a skeleton as an artifact reifies the past, presenting it as a fixed, static entity. Critical theory would question the implications of this reification, asking how it shapes our understanding of history and our relationship to the natural world. **Marxist Conflict Theory** While not overtly present, elements of Marxist thought can be extracted: * **Historical Materialism:** The connection between the Romans and Romania can be read as a historical instance of power exerted through material control – the Romans establishing dominance over the land and, in turn, shaping its nomenclature. * **Ideology:** The acceptance of the name "Romania" derived from Roman history can be viewed as part of a broader ideological framework that legitimizes and perpetuates historical power dynamics. **Postmodernism** * **Deconstruction of Truth:** The question “wonder why it’s called that” embodies a postmodern skepticism toward established narratives and “truths.” It implies that there isn’t a single, inherent reason for the name “Romania”; rather, it's a constructed meaning shaped by historical contingencies. * **Narrative & Representation:** The image and commentary function as a fragmented narrative, prompting further inquiry and challenging the notion of a coherent, unified history. * **Blurring Boundaries:** The connection between the skeletal remains of a bear, the name of a country, and the history of the Roman Empire subtly blurs the boundaries between nature, culture, and history, highlighting the interconnectedness of these realms. Let me know if you'd like any of these sections expanded or focused on in more detail.
Llama-3.2-11b's Take:
The meme is a humorous comparison between the discovery of a fossilized skeleton of a cave bear in Romania, and a similar discovery of a fossilized skeleton of a cave bear in Romania. The text "In Romania, a cave bear skeleton was found" is followed by a joke about the discovery of a similar skeleton in Romania, with the punchline "Romania, because there were once Romans there".
First Seen:
2023-05-10T21:03:35+00:00
Gemma-3-27b's Take:
Okay, let's break down this meme using the frameworks you've requested. It's a humorous image drawing from a scene in *Game of Thrones*, and while it seems simple on the surface, we can tease out some surprisingly complex interpretations. **Visual Description** The meme uses a four-panel screenshot sequence from a scene in *Game of Thrones* involving characters Varys and a woman holding a baby. * **Panel 1:** Varys is gesturing vaguely towards the baby in the woman's arms. Text reads "For your baby." * **Panel 2:** Varys is making a pinching motion with his fingers, as if to indicate "to eat." Text reads "To eat." * **Panel 3:** The woman looks shocked and horrified, cradling the baby tightly. * **Panel 4:** Varys is looking panicked, with a distressed facial expression, and the woman continues to glare at him. Text reads "She thinks you want to eat her baby." The meme's humor relies on a miscommunication - a badly phrased attempt to offer help is interpreted as cannibalism. The text overlay positions this scenario as analogous to attempting to converse with native speakers after using a language learning app (Duolingo). --- **Foucauldian Genealogical Discourse Analysis** This meme allows us to explore the construction of "communication" and "understanding" as *discourses*. * **Power/Knowledge:** The meme highlights the power dynamics inherent in language. The man's (Varys) attempt at communication, though benign in intent, is immediately interpreted through a lens of fear and mistrust (cannibalism is an extreme, primal fear). This illustrates how meaning isn't simply *transmitted*, but *constructed* within a specific historical and cultural context. The fear of cannibalism is culturally constructed, and the woman's reaction reveals the prevalence of that construction in her understanding. * **Genealogy of Misunderstanding:** A genealogical analysis might trace the roots of this misunderstanding. How did certain gestures or turns of phrase come to be associated with threat? What historical conditions gave rise to the fear of cannibalism (perhaps scarcity, tribal warfare, etc.)? The meme isn’t *about* cannibalism, but it uses the *idea* of it to expose the fragility of meaning. * **Discursive Formation:** The meme’s text (“When you finish Duolingo…”) actively *forms* a discourse. It positions language learning (Duolingo) as a system where attempts at communication are likely to be misconstrued due to limitations in fluency and cultural understanding. This actively reinforces a specific understanding of language learning and communication. --- **Critical Theory** The meme can be read through a broadly Critical Theory lens as a commentary on the challenges of cross-cultural understanding and the potential for communication to be fraught with power imbalances. * **Domination & Resistance:** The woman’s horrified reaction can be seen as a form of resistance to the man’s potentially perceived (though misconstrued) attempt to exert control or impose his will. Even a well-intentioned gesture can be interpreted as threatening when viewed through the lens of past experiences or systemic oppression. * **Ideology & False Consciousness:** The meme subtly reinforces the ideology that language is a barrier to genuine connection. It suggests that true understanding is difficult, if not impossible, and that attempts at communication are often based on incomplete or flawed knowledge. This can contribute to a sense of cynicism and resignation about the possibility of overcoming cultural divides. The humorous framing masks a potentially problematic message. * **The Problem of Representation:** The meme relies on stereotypical representation. While humorous, it *represents* the potential for miscommunication and highlights how culture can influence interpretation. This is not inherently problematic, but it needs to be critically examined. --- **Marxist Conflict Theory** While not *immediately* obvious, a Marxist reading can be teased out. * **Language as a Tool of Power:** In a Marxist framework, language is not neutral; it’s a tool used by the dominant class to maintain its power. The miscommunication in the meme can be seen as a microcosm of broader power dynamics. The man, arguably in a position of (implied) social status (given his attire and role in the show), attempts to exert influence, and the woman resists, interpreting his gesture as a threat to her most valued possession (her child). * **False Consciousness & Ideological Manipulation:** The meme subtly reinforces a narrative that communication across cultural boundaries is inherently fraught with danger. This can perpetuate a sense of alienation and division, hindering the potential for collective action and social change. * **Resource Control:** The "baby" can be a metaphor for resources. The meme highlights the tension that can emerge when different groups attempt to communicate and negotiate access to scarce resources. --- **Postmodernism** The meme embodies several key Postmodern tenets: * **Deconstruction of Meaning:** The humor arises precisely because of the breakdown of meaning. The intended message ("For your baby") is completely overturned, revealing the instability of language and the subjective nature of interpretation. * **Simulacra & Simulation:** The meme *simulates* a real-life scenario, but it’s a highly stylized and exaggerated version. It’s a representation *of* a representation, blurring the line between reality and hyperreality. * **Irony & Parody:** The meme relies on ironic juxtaposition. The scene is dramatic and potentially horrifying in the show, but the meme frames it as a lighthearted analogy to language learning. This creates a sense of playful subversion. * **Rejection of Grand Narratives:** The meme rejects the idea of universal communication or shared understanding. It suggests that meaning is always contingent, localized, and subject to misinterpretation. --- **Queer Feminist Intersectional Analysis** This is the most challenging lens to apply, but a reading is possible: * **Vulnerability & Embodiment:** The woman's reaction is intensely protective of her baby, embodying the vulnerability and embodied experience of motherhood. Her fear can be seen as a response to perceived threats to her reproductive capacity and her ability to nurture her child. * **Intersection of Power Dynamics:** While not explicitly gendered in the scene itself, the meme's context can raise questions about how gender intersects with power dynamics. The woman, as a mother, might be perceived as more vulnerable and therefore more susceptible to exploitation or control. * **Challenging Dominant Narratives about Communication:** A queer feminist perspective might challenge the assumption that effective communication requires fluency in a dominant language or adherence to conventional norms. It might emphasize the importance of listening, empathy, and respecting diverse forms of expression. The miscommunication could represent a breakdown of power dynamics. **Important Note:** These are interpretations, and the meme is open to multiple readings. The strength of these analyses varies, and some are more speculative than others. The meme’s humor lies in its simplicity, but it surprisingly lends itself to complex theoretical unpacking.
Llama-3.2-11b's Take:
The meme is a humorous take on the Duolingo language learning platform. It shows a character from the popular TV show "Game of Thrones" (Tyrion Lannister) learning to say "To eat" in a new language, but mispronouncing it as "To eat" and then "To eat" again, followed by a statement that is actually a joke about eating, implying that the person is struggling to learn the language. The text in the image reads: "When you finish Duolingo and finally work up the courage to talk to native speakers".