
JVL
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
todays bird
trying on a metaphor

Discoholic šŖ©
styofa doing anything
Not today Justin

#extradirty
Show & Tell
Peter Solarz
Sweet Seals For You, Always
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
d e v o n
One Nice Bug Per Day
taylor price

JBB: An Artblog!
RMH
almost home

oozey mess

ā
seen from United States

seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from United States

seen from Australia

seen from United States

seen from Türkiye
seen from United States

seen from Mexico

seen from United States
seen from Sweden

seen from Mexico
seen from Singapore

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@brubger
I totally forgot I drew her, so this is reeeeally old
Formation
Knight and Midsummer eve (happy pride š³ļøāš)
now available as prints and as at-home print files
Women in Shakespeare
Also like to point out that when her mother says āI was your mother much upon these years that you are now a maid,ā (translation: I had you when I was your age) you have to remember her fatherās words: āearth hath swallowed all my hopes but she,ā (translation: all the other children died.)Ā The whole plot point of Juliet being an only child is explained by her mother being a Margaret Beaufort type who had her first child too young and it damaged her past the point of being able to bear more children.
Margaret Beaufort died in 1509. She was a major player in the Wars of the Roses, the swirling on-again-off-again civil wars that consumed England from 1455-1487. Romeo and Juliet was written and first performed in the early 1590s. Your average English person of Shakespeareās day would probably have had at least a vague understanding of who she was and what happened to her, because she was a key figure in recent history and was still getting passed around as a cautionary tale.
There are two great problems with what happened to Margaret (and that her parents are trying to do to Juliet). One is easy for modern people to spot (but was also a common response back in her own day). And thatās the moral implications of what was done to her. She was too young to be married, and it was horrifying that she was forced into it so young. Every one of the adults around her either acted immorally or failed to protect her. They were wrong. This is what modern people see, and itās important to remember that people back in her day mostly agreed with it. Youāre supposed to think itās fucked up! When girls were married that young (and it didnāt happen often!) it was a formality 99% of the time. It was for dynastic or financial reasons (the girl has lots of money and/or land and/or a title that her husband wants), but the ācoupleā donāt consummate their marriage for years. And itās not just that they would have separate bedrooms. They might not even live in the same country until the girl was in her late teens and physically and mentally mature enough to bear and raise kids. Hell, a lot of times they didnāt even meet until the girl was older! They had this thing called āproxy marriageā where you would have two separate ceremonies, in two separate places, with each party saying their vows separately, one in one city and the other in a different one. So, yeah, sure, the girl was technically married at 12, but she didnāt actually meet her āhusbandā in person until she was 17 and they didnāt start sleeping together until she was 20. That was a thing they did.
The other problem, the one that modern people donāt notice, is dynastic. See, marriage wasnāt generally because you loved someone. It was because you had the resources to support a family, and you or your family wanted to pool those resources with someone. Itās about āour family has these resources, and we want that to continue.ā Itās about continuity across generations. Itās about making sure that your children and grandchildren have the best possible resources to survive and thrive, whether those resources are land or a trade or a title or money or whatever. In order for this to work, you have to have kids! The family and the familyās resources depend on the married couple having children. If the couple doesnāt have children, the marriage is a failure. And that failure affects not only the couple, but both families. This is a really big problem. And you canāt have just one kid to pass on the family name, because half of all kids die in early childhood. If you want to be safe, you need several kids, to be sure at least one will survive to adulthood (when they can marry and pass on the family name and resources.
You know what happens when a girl has her first pregnancy too young? She is very likely to either die in childbirth, or have complications that destroy her future fertility. Just like Margaret Beaufort. Just like Julietās mother. In other words, the marriage is a failure, not just for her, but also for her family, and her husband (who canāt divorce her, itās not allowed except in extremely rare circumstances), and her husbandās family. So even the people who didnāt have a moral problem with adult men having sex with pubescent girls had a practical problem with girls married too young because you are very likely to destroy the entire purpose of the marriage by doing it. As Shakespeare reminds us in the play through Julietās mother having been married too young and only having one child.
Shakespeare is telling us āyeah, this is fucked up. but even if youāre the kind of awful person who doesnāt think girls marrying too young is morally wrong, itās also a problem for practical and dynastic reasons, donāt forget that by doing this wrong thing you are very likely to destroy what you most want out of it.ā
Interesting
It bears repeating:
donāt forget that by doing this wrong thing you are very likely to destroy what you most want out of it.ā
yes, excellent discussion!
another thing i noticed, the year my local community shakespeare theater did r&j, and i made the costumes so i got to watch the show every night: part of why capulet is telling paris, take your time, get to know each other, no rush, is that he still has his nephew tybalt as his heir. as long as tybalt is in the picture, there is no pressure on juliet to go further with paris, than get acquainted. once tybalt is killed, then suddenly capulet needs an heir, he needs a husband for juliet, now, this week. (the role of capulet is best given to the actor in the company that can do over the top apoplexy, you need to believe his urgency comes at least in part by how clearly he could drop dead any moment from giving himself a stroke)
i feel like this play is often taught in middle schools as if it was somehow relevant to, or about, teen hormone storms. really it's got more to do with the social structures around family and inheritance. leaving that context out makes it confusing, why is capulet suddenly flipping from nice dad to evil dad?
art history matters.
I've been thinking about this play a lot lately. I really wanna highlight that Lord Capulet asks Paris to wait and get to know her, and to woo her, while Tybalt lives. While Tybalt is alive, Juliet has something of a reprieve, and her wellbeing as his only child matters more to Capulet. But once Tybalt has died, the gloves come off. Lord Capulet was worried about his daughter's wellbeing when he felt he had the space to care, but as soon as his dynasty is at stake, as soon as this becomes larger than Juliet's happiness, his consideration for her health and mental wellbeing get thrown away. Which also is due in part to the fact that Capulet's family is implicated in a brawl that has left several dead after the Prince's family EXPLICITLY told the Capulets and Montagues to stop fighting or face dire consequences, AND Capulet is trying to align himself with the Prince's family by marrying Juliet off to County Paris, a relative of the Prince. So to Lord Capulet, it is now less important that Juliet is happy, and more important than he reminds the Prince of his loyalty via this marriage and aligns his family with the Prince's before it's too late. And he believes this must be done, at any cost...until Juliet kills herself. And that's when he realises the devastating cost of treating his family as chess pieces. He realises his wrongdoing far too late.
Seriously Romeo and Juliet is HEAVY on the dynastic politics, and I think you can't fully understand the play without understanding how that all works, especially because the impact of dynastic marriages on women and girls is like. THE POINT of the play
All this discourse over who does "painting with light"
Hiroshi Nagai's paintings need sunglasses to look at.
They look like how it feels to walk across a parking lot on a 98° summer day without a speck of shade in sight.
They look like heaven but also like you'd burn your bare feet on the ground.
Even when you can see shade you know it's not enough and the minute you step out you'll be burnt to a crisp like a vampire.
And it's BEAUTIFUL
I'll throw in the wonderful Eizin Suzuki into this ring too, a man whose work just breathes light without actually using dynamic lighting in the usual way. It's no surprise both Nagai and Suzuki are both considered prolific in art pertaining to the city pop genre because they're able to paint these kinds of scenes with a delicate touch.
This feels like I could trip on that radio and fall right into that water, feeling the crystal waves as I drop in.
And this, a nice stroll down a resort strip, where my sunscreened skin could literally feel cooked if I leaned too close to the tiling.
And then a nice stretch of summer street, wherein you could see your face in the flushed red of that car provided it didn't blind you from its sunny reflections.
I don't think I even need to say anything more, Suzuki's a massive influence in how he even places colours so warmly in such unorthodox manner. It's a naturally sunkissed talent~ š
Actually when I say āfuck all billionairesā I particularly mean Taylor āhaving my wedding in the middle of the busiest city in the world on the busiest weekend in the world in the part of the city the majority of commuters need to get through because fuck working peopleā Swift
sheās so real
Nice throne idiot did your mommy carve a swathe of corpses to get it for you?
Donald Trump gets attacked by an eagle.
This eagle truly represents America. What a majestic symbol.
Itās only fitting that this gets reblogged today
This is the only eagle that deserves reblogging on the 4th
HAPPY 100TH MEXICAN FOOD BIRTHDAY OR WHATEVER
things Iāve noticed in the UK:
- when youāre jay walking, cars will actively accelerate bc the drivers want to kill you for breaking the rules
- servers in restaurants act very scared and apologetic, so maybe people arenāt nice to them here??? or I could be terrifying
- itās really cute when little kids have British accents, but Iām unmoved by adults with accents
- extremely good gluten free options. this country is like 20 years ahead of Canada in that regard
- people will give random insignificant buildings names with little plaques. and then thatās the name that shows up on the map. like even a smaller than average family home, you can name it like itās a dog
- lots of brick and stone buildings. looks cute and charming until you enter one and thereās no air conditioning
- people are still wearing jaguar print. I like this. donāt let it die
ohhh okay! amendment: cars will actively try to kill you for being small and made of flesh, instead of cool and metal like them
Why is it everyone that sets out to rip off the Souls series fails to include any of the goofiness? Grim as the world of Dark Souls is, it can also at times be completely ridiculous. It's got mimic chests that attack you with fucking Street Fighter hurricane kicks and giant bulging bobble eyed basilisks and whatever the hell Frampt and Kaathe are supposed to be. There's a reason these games are such a rich goldmine of memes.
Even in a dead world devoid of hope there is silliness and whimsy.
It turns out the great egg price increase that helped topple Joe Biden's regime was (checks notes) due to an alleged conspiracy among egg producers to artificially increase prices and the coverage of that fact is a blink-and-you-miss-it story on the NYT website
fisheye(s)