Semper Fi

ah297900 wrote:

I did my best to pay respect to the left 1/3 of the screen.

You go to post with the embedding skills you have---not the embedding skills you might want or wish to have at a later time.

With all due respect dude, whatever. 

I'm tipping cups to all of my jarhead brothers and sisters, it's gonna take me a while.

ah297900 wrote:

Right, right, right. You all sacrificed and served the country so I could enjoy the freedom to teach art history and generally dick around.

But I'm talking about FORMATTING. This shit is IMPORTANT. And without proper youtube formatting, then what's the point of freedom?

And you to I will also tip a cup; much thanks....and now I shall tip and trolley my way to the pisser.  It's going to be a long and entertaining weekend!!

Yep.



Fun fact: it's been credibly argued with a good deal of documentation that this painting was meant to serve as a marital aid. The footlocker-looking-thing at the back of the room is a cassone, which was a traditional wedding gift in Italy. The marital aid part for the husband is obvious: it's a really high-class Maxim spread of a known courtesan in Urbino. The interesting part is that she's shown fingerblasting herself for the instruction of the wife, whose husband was probably as ugly as she was.

ah297900 wrote:

Yep.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … an_102.jpg

Fun fact: it's been credibly argued with a good deal of documentation that this painting was meant to serve as a marital aid. The footlocker-looking-thing at the back of the room is a cassone, which was a traditional wedding gift in Italy. The marital aid part for the husband is obvious: it's a really high-class Maxim spread of a known courtesan in Urbino. The interesting part is that she's shown fingerblasting herself for the instruction of the wife, whose husband was probably as ugly as she was.

Ok, the puppy I get.  Anybody with dogs or cats know they love to be on the bed during sex time.  But what is the girl in the cassone doing, looking for a dildo or throwing up?

Another fun fact:

In the mid 1800s, a group of French artists known as Realists coalesced around the idea that art was too much about Greek myth, fairies, dalliances of the rich, and other general bullshit. They thought that art no longer dealt with REAL life (hence, Realists), so people like Millet painted scenes highlighting the unimaginably shitty lives of the French poor. For instance, these poor women were allowed to comb a field after harvest, picking up individual grains of wheat to take home for food:



Picture somebody throwing a bowl of rice into their backyard, and what you could find was what you had to feed your chrilden. That actually happened.

Other Realists like Manet painted new versions of old masterpieces to show how UNREAL traditional art was. Hence, Olympia, which was a quotation of the Titian, showing a less glossed-over idealized version of prostitution:



If this was my class, I'd ask you all how he's referencing the original, but doing so in such a way that shows how UNREALISTIC the traditional artistic presentation of the world has been.

ah297900 wrote:

It feels a little unpatriotic to hijack dusty's thread about the coast guard or whatever and make it about french art.

Not until there's 238 pictures of bitches, it isn't!

ah297900 wrote:

It feels a little unpatriotic to hijack dusty's thread about the coast guard or whatever and make it about french art.

Actually the reminder of how down trodden people have been made me feel good about the anniversary, our sacrifices - meager as they are - have actually made a small sort of difference over time.

(and yes - I'm still drinking)