Wednesday, August 20, 2014

medievalpoc:

edensmachine:

medievalpoc:

aseantoo submitted to medievalpoc:

Sir Joshua Reynolds

George Clive and his Family with an Indian Maid

England, 1765

Oil on canvas

Height: 140 cm (55.1 in). Width: 171 cm (67.3 in).

Gemäldegalerie, Berlin

[x]

From Simple English Wikipedia:

Lord George Clive was cousin of Robert Clive, founder of the empire of British India. He made his fortune there. Clearly the painter found the Indian nurse’s depiction his greatest pleasure.

Is it just me or do the white family look unreal and vacant despite contrasting the dark shades of the back drop. Yet the nurse pops and looks tangible and alive.  

A lot of people have responded similarly about the contrast between the white colonial family and the indigenous woman in this painting. Even the child is nearly as white and stiff as a corpse…and yet, these images were intentionally idealized in this manner; their very whiteness can be seen as a rebuke to the Indian woman’s vivid, tangible presence here.

This has everything to do with Color, Chromophobia, and Colonialism.

Chromophobia is marked, not just by the desire to eradicate color, but also to control and to master its forces. When we do use color, there’s some sense that it needs to be controlled; that there are rules to its use, either in terms of its quantity or its symbolic applications (e.g., don’t paint your dining room blue because it suppresses appetite). Please note that I’m not arguing against color psychology; it’s undeniable that certain colors carry certain cultural assumptions and associations, a fact that has led anthropologist Michael Taussig to argue that color should be considered a manifestation of the sacred.

But what I am arguing is that there is a pervasive idea that color gets us in the gut: it’s seductive, emotional, compelling. Color, in the words of nineteenth-century art theorist Charles Blanc, often “turns the mind from its course, changes the sentiment, swallows the thought.”

According to some art critics, sensory anthropologists, and historians, this mutual attraction and repulsion to color has centuries-old roots, bound up in a colonial past and fears of the unknown.

Michael Taussig has recounted that from the seventeenth century, the British East India Company centered much of its trade on brightly colored, cheap, and dye-fast cotton textiles imported from India. Because of the Calico Acts of 1700 and 1720, which supported the interests of the wool and silk weaving guilds, these textiles could only be imported into England with the proviso that they were destined for export again, generally to the English colonies in the Caribbean or Africa.

These vibrant textiles played a key part in the African trade, and especially in the African slave trade, where British traders would use the textiles to purchase slaves. According to Michael Taussig, these trades are significant not only because they linked chromophilic areas like India and Africa, but also because
“color achieved greater conquests than European-instigated violence during the preceding four centuries of the slave trade. The first European slavers, the Portuguese in the fifteenth century, quickly learned that to get slaves they had to trade for slaves with African chiefs and kings, not kidnap them, and they conducted this trade with colored fabrics in lieu of violence.”

Where I differ with Taussig is that there is very little doubt in my mind that using the concept of aesthetics in the manner can absolutely be a form of violence, and that art can be used to subjugate.

Say what you will about this being an exaggeration, but I wasn’t the one cleaning the Elgin marbles in acid in the 1800s to better fit a misconception of whiteness…after all, Greek marbles originally looked something like this, much to the chagrin of western aestheticism everywhere:

image

image

image

So when you consider the historical context of the painting in the original post, it becomes entirely likely that the stiffness and whiteness of the colonial family is meant as a desirable contrast to the vibrantly alive Indian woman.

And you should also consider what kind of ideas you have about her from the painting, and think on how your view of her is affected by the context. Is she somehow more “natural” or “wild” than the family? Is she “earthy”? How is her existence affected by the fact that she is situated below even the child in the composition…do her arms ache from holding her up?

I had never seen this painting before it was submitted, and I wonder why that is. There are a lot of things about it that are unpleasant, but the ideas in it influence us anyways.

i literally tried to make up a nice caption for this one but i failed. there’s no word in any language in this word, not even in Gallifreyan i think, to describe the happiness in the eyes and the laugh of this man… 
only 3 sleeps left Peter, just 3 of them…
[x]

(Source: capaldilieu)

tsumikis:

"So please, remember me
 As vivid as I used to be."
Friday, August 15, 2014

saidochi:

I downloaded GifCam and to test it out I did this B)

Maidosuji 

(THE GIFS ARE ACTUALLY REALLY SMALL BECAUSE I HECKED UP OOPS)

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

buckysexual:

maskedfangirl:

marvelcolm:

Guys, please read my extremely NSFW Guardians of the Galaxy fanfic told from the perspective of Groot here.

I don’t normally rec a lot of PWP, but wow. Stop what you’re doing and read this, you won’t regret it!

image

Sunday, August 3, 2014
melanijann:

fandomsandfeminism:

how-to-vidya:

The evolution of girl gamers

Boy gamers are so self-centered they act as though women haven’t been playing video games for decades, and then act horrified when the female gamers who have always been there actually become visible and vocal about the rampant misogyny that has infected the gaming world. 
Like seriously, how entitled do you have to be that women saying “it sure would be nice if I wasn’t treated like shit while enjoying the games I play” translates to “I must be catered to” when video games have LITERALLY been catered to men for decades? 

More like:
1993 - 64% of girls reported playing video games 
1996 - "home use had increased for fourth grade girls"
1998 - "both male and female adolescents play video games on a regular basis." 
1999 - "88% of the female college students … surveyed were video game players."
2007 - 20-47% of adolescent girls play video games
2008 - "94% of girls play video games"
2010 - "Forty percent of all game players are women." 
2012 - "Women 18 or older represent a significantly greater portion of the game-playing population (30%) than boys age 17 or younger" 
2013 -"adult women are nearly half of all video game players"
I didn’t get all the dates, but I think you can get the point.
Also considered posting my own personal gaming history, but I would’ve had to go back to the 80s for that. e_e

melanijann:

fandomsandfeminism:

how-to-vidya:

The evolution of girl gamers

Boy gamers are so self-centered they act as though women haven’t been playing video games for decades, and then act horrified when the female gamers who have always been there actually become visible and vocal about the rampant misogyny that has infected the gaming world. 

Like seriously, how entitled do you have to be that women saying “it sure would be nice if I wasn’t treated like shit while enjoying the games I play” translates to “I must be catered to” when video games have LITERALLY been catered to men for decades? 

More like:

I didn’t get all the dates, but I think you can get the point.

Also considered posting my own personal gaming history, but I would’ve had to go back to the 80s for that. e_e

Friday, August 1, 2014

Fortissimo!

Sunday, July 27, 2014 Thursday, July 24, 2014
Tooth.

Tooth.

Sunday, July 20, 2014
dyk91:

Midousuji’s morning :P

dyk91:

Midousuji’s morning :P