If you cant attend life drawing sessions. This is the best thing for you
Let me show you something I recently found : Croquis Cafe!
You get to see models of different colors and shapes in a life drawing setting. They move and breath while posing (breathing like in real life :O) ambient music is playing in the background and you have 1, 2 and 5 minute sessions. I find it very helpful , you should try it.
You know what’s weird? BODIES.
You know what absolutely is not made of straight, smooth lines? BODIES.
You know what we all have in common? BODIES.
You know what we need to drastically reframe our view of? BODIES.
#cleopatra with the nose knocked off. I wonder if people still think she was European like the movies betray…
I still think it’s one of the most desperate things whites have done to blacks and to black history. The disrespect is outrageous. They came to our country and mentally could not fathom how these black civilizations could be so great. They literally rode through our lands and shot the noses off of our statues. Why? So that the statues would no longer resemble the African people and they could LIE about the origins of Egypt and countless other civilizations. It was a widespread practice. It’s why statues of Pharaoh’s and their wives have no noses. It’s why the Sphinx has no nose. When I was in middle and high school, we were taught that the noses had fell off due to time and poor craftsmanship! They have literally tried to teach us that our ancestors were shitty builders of noses just to hide their malicious destruction of our heritage. European fears of African peoples had to come from somewhere. I want to know what part of the history is missing. There’s something that they don’t want to be told.
The shade is real
i was taught that the noses fell off as well and actually continued to believe this. in retrospect this makes no sense, considering greek/roman statues pretty much always have intact noses whereas egyptian ones are always conveniently missing theirs. thank you for pointing this out to me, i hadn’t even made that connection until now.
The bolded was me too and I am seriously embarrassed that I never even thought about how that could be false.
Damnnn. I hate myself for not realizing this.
I hate myself even more, since I know the ancient Egyptians created their sculptural works with the idea of permanence in mind. They were literally built to last throughout the afterlife. Notice how the majority of their monumental sculpture is stone-bound, without any protruding elements or breakable appendages. That’s because many of these sculptures were intended to house the life-force (Ka) of those they portrayed. Of their favorite materials were basalt and diorite, both extremely hard stones that were incredibly difficult to carve. Meaning a nose just doesn’t “fall off” because of “poor craftsmanship,” you would literally have to take a hammer to it. Fuckers.
Cleopatra was black, she was as black as Cicely Tyson. -Paul Mooney
Don’t hate yourself, and don’t be embarrassed. This is one of the biggest things that they have done to try and uphold the myth of Black inferiority/White supremacy. Erasing Blackness is what they’ve been doing since Day 1. They’ve done it then, they do it now, and they’ll keep doing it until the world ends.
I remember I cried my eyes out when i found out what happened to them AND that they were Black.
And then I decided I wanted to be a pharaoh. Did i spell right I’m sleepy.Your new nickname is Hatshepsut Jr
“ I want to know what part of the history is missing. There’s something that they don’t want to be told.”
The famous Carthaginian general who lead an army over the alps to sack Rome and pretty much utterly humiliated them?
He was black. They leave that out of the history books.
And the vast majority of modern european culture has a huge influence from ancient Rome.
imagine somebody who’s immortal having a gigantic room where all the walls are completely covered up with photos.
each one is of a different loved one whom they have outlived
STOP RIGHT THERE
ahhh this already has like fifty million notes but i just thought this was a really sweet idea… i didn’t get to draw the room as big as i wanted too ;_; but this is only 1/4th of that room or something!!!!
guys there are two wedding photos
this was challenging!
A super girly and peppy blonde girl who wears bright pink dresses and skirts everyday is best friends with a quiet goth girl who of course sports all black clothing and big lace up boots. Someone jokes and yells to them “Hey look, a fairy and a vampire!” The blonde turns around and flashes a fanged grin and says “She’s human actually.”
This has been done before, I’m sure.
how cool is this?
MedievalPOC is scamming you, here’s how and why:
- For all that MedievalPOC railed against how “awful” periodization in this reblog, what they mostly did was prove they have ABSOLUTELY NO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT PERIODIZATION IS OR HOW IT WORKS.
Which is okay! Not everyone does. But if you’re a history blog, trying to pass off Italian Baroque Art from the 1670’s as from the Georgian period is flat out wrong on every humanly possible level. How do I know it’s not Georgian, but Italian Baroque? Well, MPOC actually directly linked folks back to the original works and then bet NO ONE would check their facts.
Talk about incriminating receipts, right? It’s a mistake anyone could make….except this is a history blog, and it’s not an easy mistake to make when you’re in the wrong CENTURY. The last photo is my accurate to period examples that i found quickly.
Periodization, by the way: an act or instance of dividing a subject into historical eras for purposes of analysis and study. Periods are “named blocks of time” that can be geographically specific. They are often named for major historical events, famous people, or dates. Periods are useful for analyzing change, continuity, or advances over time. Examples: Meiji Japan, the Renaissance, the gilded age, the long 19th century, the 60’s.
- So MPOC hates historiography because its fluid/changing, different from art history in many ways, and not always precise — and therefore wrong. Then proceeds to prove their point by suggesting that the United States experienced the Victorian Era.
Which, granted, the US did experience a multitude of influences from the “victorian era” but….it’s also no longer a part of the British empire in the 19th century.
- MPOC is asking people to pay them…..to break the law and/or do things that you can literally do yourself, for free or are already available for a price. IE: selling art prints of POC in art owned by different resources (museums, galleries, private owners, etc) is actually really illegal and against copyright. It’s technically illegal to put these images online without permissions anyways, but you don’t make a profit off of selling the art that isn’t owned by you when you do it. Interested in prints? Well you can either print off the image yourself for free, or buy them from the actual museums and galleries themselves, furthering the support of the actual items! When you buy prints or postcards of art DIRECTLY from museums, you are funding museums. the money they get from giftshops is actually VERY IMPORTANT because museums and databases like the ones MPOC use are NON-PROFIT organizations AND this money will go to funding the museum, be that for outreach to children, conserving the art, paying their staff, publishing free educational materials, etc. It is an absolutely vital source of income for museums that serve their communities and want to keep their art accessible.
There are a few collections which are free for reproduction commercially, like the National Gallery of Art but this isn’t the norm across the board. Besides that? Well I realize buying a $95 art book may be out of the range for some people’s pockets (TRUST ME: having been someone required to buy a lot of these textbooks which are pricey because of the vast amount of copyright fees paid to publish them), there are cheaper or used similar books on amazon AND several museums and universities have published some of their older books online for FREE. Which includes The Met. Why are you going to pay someone else to read books for you when they don’t even give you the facts right??
- they want $1,200 a month to make lesson plans and curricula about art and art history but can’t even differentiate between two separate countries in two different time periods. This isn’t “one mistake” I found. This is systematically getting things wrong, including the time they claimed that Queen Urraca of Spain might possibly be Muslim — despite the fact that Queen Urraca of Spain spent her career helping and advocating the Reconquista - AKA the murder of muslim people in Spain. Uhhhh…
Which of course: These lesson plans? Stuff like this already exists! By (surprise) Museum educators whose JOB it is full time to make this stuff. It’s almost like this stuff is ALREADY free online [The Met, The Getty, Asian Art Museum… pretty much any major museum on the planet….] AND THIS STUFF IS AVAILABLE AND READY TO BE USED. A LOT OF IT IS FREE. How do I know this magical stuff??? because (and I’m guessing here) UNLIKE MPOC I have actually taken a class on museum education.
- MPOC is offering to write a book. a really real published book. SPOILER ALERT: in the art history world, you GENERALLY have a PhD before you publish a book. Why? Because the PhD certifies you as an expert in the thing you study and it is an academic topic. No university/academic publisher alive would risk this. Is it maybe an ivory tower elitist thing? hell yeah it is. Would any editor in their right mind publish a book as riddled with basic factual errors as much as the MPOC blog? Hell no they would not. What about those publishers who publish psuedo-historical books like “PS ‘everything was made by aliens’” ? Well unless they want their asses sued to hell and back over copyrights, they probably won’t be able to foot the necessary bills for these images. Independent publishing doesn’t make any of it LESS illegal. They want to cover the license costs with crowd funding???
According to Linda Downs, executive director of the College Art Association, image permissions and licensing costs for a 200-page art-history book average $7,000 to $10,000. Authors usually have to cover those costs themselves. Scholars in disciplines that aren’t so visual might jump at the chance to publish in both print and online formats, Ms. Downs told me in an e-mail. But “art historians will choose one or the other” because they might get hit with two sets of permissions fees and other restrictions. Good luck with that. In order to recoup those kinds of costs the books will NOT be cheap.
- MPOC has been called out by several NDN bloggers regarding the fact that they have been caught lying about their Native/POC heritage. Although the days of stupid_free and fandom_wank have long past, now we have other ways to collect receipts and here AND ALSO HERE REALLY IMPORTANT and know that they are white, white, white — and lied about who they were. Like here’s a hint there are NO Lakota reservations in AZ. If you really miss livejournal, however, you can see the call out on SF_DRAMA. The internet will never forget a white girl co-opting POC to garner cash.
- they also have ZERO UNDERSTANDING of how to treat jewish people in europe in history. which is called out here better than I ever can or could because I am not jewish. they also fumble with the Roma (which they claim to be) and that + the judaism issue is also called out here.
- don’t send this person harassment but don’t give them money holy shit y’all you are being scammed. SCAMMED. do not PAY people to feed you half-assed poor researched bullshit that is available free online.
- a poc who is tired of the “best diversity in history” blog being wrong about pretty much everything
What drives me nuts about MPOC is not just the fact that they present themselves as an authority on a subject that they have no learned expertise in. It’s that they present themselves as an authority not DESPITE having no expertise (which tbh I wouldn’t mind that much b/c at least it’s honest), but BECAUSE they have no expertise. They are part of a general trend on tumblr that asserts there is nothing valuable to be learned within the realm of post-secondary education, and the further outside traditional academics an individual is, the more trustworthy a source that individual becomes and the less their methods and words are questioned. It’s a form of reactionary anti-intellectualism and it’s also incredibly dishonest:
… self-described intellectuals who are alleged to fail to adhere to rigorous standards of scholarship may be described as anti-intellectuals although pseudo-intellectualism is a more commonly… used description for this phenomenon.
In public discourse, anti-intellectuals are usually perceived and publicly present themselves as champions of the common folk—populists against political elitism and academic elitism—proposing that the educated are a social class detached from the everyday concerns of the majority, and that they dominate political discourse and higher education. 
The reason it’s dishonest is because even though MPOC’s modus operandi is noble and a worthy pursuit of historical study, the blog is run with the attitude that it is a solitary example of progressivescholarship in a sea of rigid, racist academics who obviously don’t examine or re-asses their methodology. Because it’s not like there is an ENTIRE FIELD OF STUDY DEDICATED TO DOING JUST THAT. MPOC likes to position themselves as an anti-establishment contrarian who is overturning dominant western myths that would NEVER EVER get questioned or discussed within the realms of actual academia. Just look at this shit they said recently when questioned about the veracity of wikipedia (emphasis mine):
"… the farther back you go, the fewer objects and documents that survive, so it becomes more open to individual interpretation.
And one of the problems there is that you get to a point where there are these interpretations that are considered beyond questioning or revising. It’s like, somewhere between “wicked rude” and “you’ll never get funding if you keep on like that”. As if revisiting primary sources is desecrating sacred ground; as if just kind of bypassing Mr. I Wrote The Book on It 300 Years Ago is equivalent to summoning the Elder Gods to consume civilization as we know it.
Which is why I do get messages from historians and “historians” like, “your methods are disgusting and unacceptable!!!” because yes, yes, I’m breaking the rules; yes, yes, I’m Doing It Wrong. I am a Bad Historian. I think this fails to take into account that I’ll go ahead and cite [that book]… but then I’ll have the brazen gall to disagree on the interpretation of that evidence.” 
They paint the academic study of history as inherently retrograde and incapable of self-reflection or change. In the atmosphere of debate MPOC creates, a “real historian” - the kind that frequently questions the methodology of MPOC - would NEVER have the “brazen gall” to question “Mr. I Wrote the Book 300 Years Ago” because the dominant western historical narrative is apparently sacrosanct. This is completely inaccurate, which MPOC would know if they had ever taken a single fucking history class in their entire lives, or even if they, you know, read the WIKIPEDIA PAGES for basic fucking things like the Annales School, E.H. Carr’s ‘What is History?’, Postcolonialism or Historical Revisionism. Hey, while we’re here, let’s check out the definition of that last one!!!!:
In historiography, historical revisionism is the reinterpretation of orthodox views on evidence, motivations, and decision-making processes surrounding a historical event. Though the word revisionism is sometimes used in a negative way, constant revision of history is part of the normal scholarly process of writing history.
Let’s repeat and emphasize that last sentence "CONSTANT REVISION OF HISTORY IS PART OF THE !!!NORMAL!!! SCHOLARLY PROCESS OF WRITING HISTORY”. Wow, it’s almost like MPOC’s insistence that academic historians “don’t question” secondary sources that “have been around long enough” is a completely bullshit statement designed to make their naive readers skeptical and distrustful of rigorous scholarship in order to give false authority to their own statements.
They don’t even explain coherently WHY they hate certain types of methodology and historiography, they simply react against them because if it’s part of the establishment it must be wrong and if the establishment is wrong, that means MPOC is the authority on the subject and if you question them, it’s because you’re narrow-minded. They spend a lot of time furiously debunking various forms of methodology and categorization as “irrelevant” seemingly because they’ve been called out on not understanding the basic tenants (ie; their tireless crusade against periodization based entirely on a strawman of what they think periodization is and the fact that they’ve been questioned multiple times about their inaccurate application of historical periods).
I’m not saying that it’s impossible to be a fantastic amateur historian. I’m not making an argument that only people who have been formally and academically trained in a subject are allowed to talk about it. I’m saying that MPOC deliberately misrepresents what formal academic history is so that it’s easy for them to dismiss criticism of their own methodology. I actually think they have the potential to be a p. decent history blog if just they would stop trying to position themselves as some sort of iconoclastic history Robin Hood.
Objectivity is a myth. We don’t suddenly stop being human when we start thinking about something! The problem is that there is a lack of openness, a lack of discussion, and a massive amount if bias that only goes one way. There is only one narrative, and no counternarrative. 
Provably untrue. There is no want for discussion and counter-narrative in academic historiography.
I agree that objectivity is a largely a myth, but MPOC does a dishonest double-whammy by insisting that because objectivity is objectively impossible, it’s pointless (and implicitly bigoted) to strive for it. They also use the “objectivity is a myth” defense to create a paradigm in which they can admit their bias while still positioning their scholarship as intrinsically more “truthy” than the “real historians” who criticize them because their bias is noble and progressive.
I’ve said time after time after TIME, THIS IS THE STUFF YOU DON’T. LEARN. IN. CLASSES. IF YOU WANT THE STUFF YOU LEARN IN CLASS, GO TO CLASS. AREN’T YOU LUCKY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT AND GET YOUR APPROVED TRUTHS IN THE APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENT. 
How many times do people who actually went to university for history have to tell MPOC that a lot of this stuff is commonly taught in their programs and, furthermore, most of it is historiography 101. Hell, I went to a tiny, local university not particularly known for it’s history department and my ‘Western Civilization 1000’ course was about the interconnected histories of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. We spent as long studying Ethiopia as we did the rise of Islam and the Reformation. Our textbooks were very common, widely taught academic readers used throughout North America and English-speaking Europe so it’s not like it was some kind of intentionally revisionist course or w/e.
Do any of you have any idea how amazing the concept of “we have created entirely new questions regarding ancient history/historiography” is????
We have proved that this level of discourse can be made accessible, and I’m pretty sure we all just leveled up. 
The discussion on MPOC is TOTALLY REVOLUTIONARY SCHOLARSHIP that would otherwise NOT BE ACCESSIBLE TO LAYPEOPLE!!! AMAZING!!!! They are asking questions that have NEVER BEEN ASKED!!!!
MPOC claims from one side of their mouth that they don’t intend for their readers to take them as an authority and they welcome well-thought out criticism  while from the other side they insist that they are a source of information and perspective that is otherwise unrepresented in the academic world.
The blog is scholarship by a person who insists that traditional methodology is unimportant. MPOC also emphasizes the myth of “inaccessible” academia, adding to an atmosphere that discourages people from engaging with critical scholarship because it’s “elitist” and only for “rich white kids” despite the increasing efforts on the part of scholars from minority or oppressed groups to make scholarly readings available and inclusive.
LIKE THE ONES OP LINKED IN THEIR POST. GO CHECK THOSE OUT IF YOU’RE INTERESTED.
As an amateur furniture maker who is a lady, it has been really interesting to hear some of the comments men make when they find out that my wife and I made a lot of the pieces in our home. My favorite is when this super macho 6ft+ guy who is a friend of a friend was in our house. After seeming completely shocked that Claire and I had made our farmhouse dining room table by ourselves from scratch, he then proceeded to SIT ON THE EDGE OF IT, his feet off the floor, and CHAT WITH US like it was no big deal, almost like he was testing whether or not the table would fall apart, to prove to us that our handiwork wasn’t so impressive after all. Despite his gigantic muscle-bound body pressing weight on the very edge of the table, it did NOT fall apart, but I am ashamed to admit that I was so shocked at his behavior that I didn’t even say anything to him about it. My mouth hung open and I was in a dazed state for several minutes afterwards. HOW DARE HE!!!! Who the hell SITS on someone’s dining room table anyways?? Why are two women any less capable of making furniture than a man, or two men, or three men? I don’t think he realized how obtuse he was being, but I have never ever forgotten it, and I have been passively aggressively rude to him ever since (not proud of it, but I feel like I kind of got a glimpse of his true self when he acted that way, so whatever).
Men tend to come to our home, question several times whether or not I made the object in question (“you made this? YOU made this? And it’s NOT from Ikea?”) and then they look underneath the piece to see if they can find any flaws, any hints of a lie, a weak spot. Conversely, women in our home usually run their fingers down the piece, admiring it, not scrutinizing it, and they almost always say “I can’t believe you made this!”, which is very different from “are you SURE you made this?” I guess it’s because women are fully aware of what we can accomplish, even if it seems difficult or unlikely; they know the possibility is there. The overwhelming majority of men (not all of them- I have seen some men come into our home and offer much praise and genuine appreciation for what we have created without a hint of doubt as to our abilities) would more easily assume that you are lying to them than to believe that you accomplished something that they have not. It’s a fascinating glimpse into the way women’s power is perceived in our culture, and I don’t singlehandedly blame men for this kind of thinking- all of us can be, in some way or another, responsible for this kind of antiquated thinking.
Anyways, to celebrate the power of using our wits and skills and bodies, for those of fortunate enough to be able to do so, here is a list of some of my favorite builds.
From top to bottom:
1. Bathroom vanity (I did the tiling as well as the build)
2. Kitchen island on casters (my Dad worked on this with me when he came to visit last year and it was super fun, but he was too afraid to use the saw, which I totally respect- nothing to play around with if it makes you uncomfortable!)
3. Office bookshelf
4. Printer console w hairpin legs
5. Dining room table bench
6. Farmhouse table (this and the bench are the first pieces Claire and I ever made)
7. Upholstered chair (this armchair had been in Claire’s family for decades and was pretty old and warped so it was taken down to it’s springs and rebuilt from there- it was SO much work but SO fun)
8. coffee table with two built in cubbies and undershelf
9. upholstered MCM dining room chairs
There are a few more pieces, but these are the only pics I could easily find this morning. I think I’m going to make a sewing/cutting table on casters for the craft room (inspired by Heather at closetcasefiles) when the weather gets cooler and working in the garage wont be so uncomfortable!
our ends are beginnings
Knit one row a day for a year, matching the yarn color to the color of the sky that day.
I absolutely love the end result.
i can’t believe i watched that
i thought this was going to take me on a spiritual journey and it did
a little love story about mermaids and tattoos
Absolutely amazing polymer clay journals by © Anna Kolesnikova (Mandarin Duck). Take a look at her portfolio, it’s really something.
You can look around in her Etsy shop here.
Also she has a very cool YouTube channel filled with tutorials and all kinds of crafty videos.
Become a fan of her on Facebook here.