constant funk

shit.

April 2014, 35mm

moshita:

Anatomical Wax Model, Firenze, Tuscany, Italy, 1771-1800 by Clemente Susini

What is odd about this model? It could be described in many ways – beautiful, exposed, sexually alluring. Is that consistent with its role as an anatomical teaching model? Should it have these qualities, or other more scientific ones?Wax anatomical models of this period had different uses for different audiences. In the European anatomical tradition, the standard or normative body was always male. Female bodies were studied in terms of how they differed. In practice this meant a focus on their reproductive capacities – most often they were pregnant, with a foetus as one of the removable pieces.But does this explain the model’s passive, sexualised pose? Female wax anatomical models were often referred to as ‘Venuses’, after the goddess of love and beauty. Reclining on silk or velvet cushions, in positions copied from works of art, they often had flowing hair and jewellery, which added nothing to their anatomical use. They served to show not just physical differences but also gender differences, as perceived in European culture at that time.A third way of understanding the model is to see the exposed body layers as a symbol of nature ‘unveiling herself’ to the medical gaze. Looking deep into the body was considered to be the route to knowledge. In just one model, ideas about art, anatomy, gender, flesh and knowledge were all conveyed. So it is not surprising if you have mixed reactions to the model – it was made that way.

welcomeimages

moshita:

Anatomical Wax Model, Firenze, Tuscany, Italy, 1771-1800 by Clemente Susini

What is odd about this model? It could be described in many ways – beautiful, exposed, sexually alluring. Is that consistent with its role as an anatomical teaching model? Should it have these qualities, or other more scientific ones?

Wax anatomical models of this period had different uses for different audiences. In the European anatomical tradition, the standard or normative body was always male. Female bodies were studied in terms of how they differed. In practice this meant a focus on their reproductive capacities – most often they were pregnant, with a foetus as one of the removable pieces.

But does this explain the model’s passive, sexualised pose? Female wax anatomical models were often referred to as ‘Venuses’, after the goddess of love and beauty. Reclining on silk or velvet cushions, in positions copied from works of art, they often had flowing hair and jewellery, which added nothing to their anatomical use. They served to show not just physical differences but also gender differences, as perceived in European culture at that time.

A third way of understanding the model is to see the exposed body layers as a symbol of nature ‘unveiling herself’ to the medical gaze. Looking deep into the body was considered to be the route to knowledge. In just one model, ideas about art, anatomy, gender, flesh and knowledge were all conveyed. So it is not surprising if you have mixed reactions to the model – it was made that way.

welcomeimages

(via ayrismag)

No parking

No parking

Saw this Singer Sargent today at ISGM, found these three pictures on the web at home. Check out that cross in the front.

Saw this Singer Sargent today at ISGM, found these three pictures on the web at home. Check out that cross in the front.

Had the most fantastic fancy afternoon with @driftwould !

Had the most fantastic fancy afternoon with @driftwould !

Hidden John Singer Sargent that I’ve never noticed before (at Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum)

Hidden John Singer Sargent that I’ve never noticed before (at Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum)

orthodoxheart:

St Stephen’s church bridegroom icon. Holy Week awesomeness.

orthodoxheart:

St Stephen’s church bridegroom icon. Holy Week awesomeness.

This place is gorgeous! I hope I get to pick up more shifts here in the future, come visit the new Tortilla Flat Epping! (at Tortilla Flat)

This place is gorgeous! I hope I get to pick up more shifts here in the future, come visit the new Tortilla Flat Epping! (at Tortilla Flat)

Jesse and I visited MBE yesterday

Jesse and I visited MBE yesterday

refinedmind:

Just before nightfall I decided to take a walk outside. The sky was low, enveloping any object in its reach. It formed a dull, purplish haze - like nothing I’d seen before. The streets were empty. Not a single soul was out. It was oddly peaceful - imagining I was the only one left.

(via akumahowl)

That’s smart.. people don’t fuck with someone reading a book, because they know you know something they don’t

—What some guy told me in a packed diner full of drunks at 3 am on Saturday, while I was devouring some Joseph Campbell

darksilenceinsuburbia:

Ghosts in the Sun: Hitler’s Personal Photographers at Dachau, 1950

Do places have memories? Do buildings where people did terrible, bestial things to other human beings somehow retain an echo of that savagery within their walls, their floors, their foundations? Is it just our imagination that makes the skin crawl at places like Cambodia’s Genocide Museum, or Elimina Castle in Ghana, or any one of the Nazi’s extermination and slave-labor camps — or is it possible that there’s still something there, palpable and chilling, years later?

Even the most die-hard realist might find it hard to resist those sorts of questions when looking at Hugo Jaeger’s eerily quiet, color pictures from Dachau in 1950. Jaeger, after all, was not just another visitor to the former concentration camp; as Adolf Hitler’s personal photographer, he traveled with and chronicled Hitler and his Nazi cohorts at rallies, military parades, parties and, frequently, in quieter, private moments. The photos Jaeger made during his stint with Hitler were evidently so attuned to the Führer’s vision of what a Thousand Year Reich might look like that Hitler himself reportedly declared, upon seeing Jaeger’s early work: “The future belongs to color photography.