Happy Thanksgiving from JC Leyendecker!
Game of Thrones Daily

titsay
hello vonnie

Kaledo Art
Xuebing Du

tannertan36
Sweet Seals For You, Always

pixel skylines
styofa doing anything
Jules of Nature
todays bird

shark vs the universe
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
Show & Tell
Claire Keane

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
No title available
dirt enthusiast
sheepfilms
Misplaced Lens Cap

seen from South Korea
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Netherlands

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Poland

seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Iraq
seen from United States
seen from Italy

seen from Malaysia
seen from Iraq
seen from Iraq
@malfatta
Happy Thanksgiving from JC Leyendecker!
June, 1921 ad for Interwoven Socks, illustrated by Leyendecker.
Ridolfo and Gismonda by J.C. Leyendecker (1906)
Perseus and Medusa (1910). J.C. Leyendecker. Print - Illustration (McClure’s Magazine, cover)
Arrow Collars Advertisement (1912). J.C. Leyendecker. Illustration
malebeautyinart:
Man reading book (1916). J.C. Leyendecker.
gennerator:
Ridolfo and Gismonda by J.C. Leyendecker, 1906
“Lots of artists can fill their work with aching homosexual tension, but no one else can make the impending sodomy look quite as classy and exquisitely dressed as Leyendecker can.” - source
Before Rockwell, a Gay Artist Defined the Perfect American Male "Nobody had to tell J.C. Leyendecker that sex sells. Before the conservative backlash of the mid-20th century, the American public celebrated his images of sleek muscle-men, whose glistening homo-eroticism adorned endless magazine covers. Yet Leyendecker’s name is almost forgotten, whitewashed over by Norman Rockwell’s legacy of tame, small-town Americana.
"Rockwell was just an 11-year old kid when Leyendecker created the legendary “Arrow Collar Man” in 1905, used to advertise the clothing company’s miraculous detachable collars. One of America’s first recognizable sex symbols, this icon of masculinity was defined by his poise and perfection, whether on the sports field or at the dinner table. Like the Gibson Girl, the Arrow Collar Man developed a singular identity, equal parts jock and dandy, who supposedly received more fan letters than silent film heartthrob Rudolph Valentino. To top things off, Leyendecker’s men were often modeled after his lover and lifetime companion, Charles Beach, making their secret romance a front-page feature across the U.S.”
- continue reading this article by Hunter Oatman-Stanford in Collectors Weekly.
Additional reading can be found at one of my favorite sites: Gay Influence.
J.C. Leyendecker in 1895.
JC Leyendecker
Joseph Christian Leyendecker
Men reading, 1914
Arrow Collar advertisement
Oil on canvas, 19" x 39"
The Rescue of Gismonda by Joseph Christian Leyendecker, 1906
From the Egerton R. Williams Jr., novel Ridolfo: The Coming of the Dawn
Heritage
Cover art by J.C. Leyendecker, 1947
Someone in the notes of the last Leyendecker post I reblogged mentioned having difficulty telling his work and Rockwell’s apart, and I know from experience that many people get them confused, which is somewhat astonishing as, to my eyes, their styles are very distinct. Leyendecker was Rockwell’s idol and mentor, but they were very different people and were interested in portraying different aspects of humanity, even when the basic subject matter was the same.
Surface-level, here are some differences:
Leyendecker smoothed out faults and imperfections (in the young. he stylized them in the old); Rockwell exaggerated them to mild or moderate caricature
Leyendecker approached his paintings as sculpture- even the merest clothing folds are carved out of the paint; Rockwell approached his paintings as drawings- the underlying contour always shines through.
Leyendecker used broad hatching brushstrokes and areas of smooth shine; Rockwell used more naturalistic texture and lighting
Leyendecker created idolized, larger-than-life figures that feel Hellenistic in their perfection; Rockwell created intimate scenes populated by figures that feel familiar in their specificity
Leyendecker’s best and most comfortable work was as a fashion/lifestyle illustrator; Rockwell’s best and most comfortable work was as an editorial/humor illustrator
Leyendecker created beautiful still lives with his figures; Rockwell told compelling stories
Leyendecker often created erotic tension in his paintings; Rockwell almost never did.
See below: Two paintings of soldiers with women, but in Rockwell’s there is a clear punchline, and while the poses are contrived for the sake of composition, they’re not self-conscious. The women are pretty- as demanded by the central joke- but not truly sexualized anywhere but in the mind of the young soldier who is being overloaded with cake and attention.
Contrast Leyendecker’s soldiers with a young nurse. Everyone in this image is posing attractively- no one has their mouth full or ears sticking out. Each crease and fold is sharp and sculptural, and the light picks out their best features- in particular the shoulders and posterior of the soldier facing away from the viewer. There is neither joke nor story, merely a group of beautiful young people, portrayed with deft brushwork and graceful lines. (and check out that hatching! That’s indicator #1 that you’ve got a Leyendecker image)
Leyendecker was very comfortable with “hot young things wearing clothes”, and did them very VERY well, but his facility with idealization came at the cost of personalization, which was fine for fashion illustration, but shows in his domestic scenes:
Beautiful, but… cold. (Also, that hand on the left- who holds a baby with their hand like that??? Good lord, J.C.) Compare a Rockwell illustration (for a baby food brand, I believe) of a mother and baby: this is clearly a real and individual young mother and baby, interacting exactly how parents and babies really interact.
Even when they did basically the same content, and putting aside posing or composition or anything other than objective visual analysis, it’s still obvious who is who:
Red: NR’s smoother rendering vs JCL’s super cool hatching
Green: NR’s naturalistic cloth folds vs JCL’s sculptural stylization
Blue: NR’s natural lighting vs JCL’s world where everything is shiny
Now go forth, confident in the knowledge that you’ll never confuse a Rockwell or a Leyendecker ever again, and can refute any claim that their styles are ‘virtually identical’.
Interesting post! I have to agree that their styles are completely different, but I’ve spent a lot of time looking at Leyendecker’s work (which I strongly prefer.) This is a good guide for anyone who isn’t sure about the differences between the artists’ work and would like to learn more.
Hairstyles of the 18th Century
As requested, here’s a simple and quite basic timeline of hairstyle during the 18th century. It is mostly eurocentric, because most of fashion moved from Europe (especially France) to the rest of the world (even if a style was not originated there).
I thought to give you all a glimpse into the main changes of the century, of how hairstyling and wigs changed through the years, and how different the looks from the early century are from the ones of the late century: how we can see the change from the Baroque to the Regency era, and the rise and fall of the Rococo style.
So, in the images above, you can see a detail of a portrait of woman and a man from each decade of the century, starting in the 1700s and ending with the 1790s. Of course there are several examples for each decade, but I chose to use just two as a way of simplifying. But you can see the full paintings and more references in this Pinterest board I made.
I like to divide the century style in four parts just because that’s how I get it better: early, mid and late century, and the turn of the century. And of course each with its own cute little subtitle.
EARLY 18TH CENTURY a.k.a. fuck yeah the Baroque is still here (1700s-1730s)
WOMAN - For the late 17th century and early 18th century, the key hairstyle is the fontange, or top-knot in England, which is a hairstyle with the front hair piled up high, and in the late 17th century accompanied by a lace hairddress that could reach quite interesting heights. The hairstyles we see in the portraits above, are fontanges, but the frelange headdress got smaller and smaller until it disappeared.
The hair lost height until the 1720s, when low, simple hairdos took place, but the curls were not lost, they just turned into the tête de mouton.
MAN - the full bottomed wig is THE wig of the early 18th century, with its fluffy curls in natural colours or white, almost waist length and middle parted. This style was originated by Louis XIII in 1624, when he lost his hair it turned from the natural hair to wigs for everyone, since such volume is hard to achieve and keep. So, more is more. This style was worn pretty much until the 1730s.
During this time we see the emergence of the bag wig in the 1720s (the hair was tied at the back and then put in a small black bag, curls were made over the ears), and the bob wig (hair falling just below the ears, it had curls or a simple frizz all over) begins to be worn in the 30s
MID 18TH CENTURY a.k.a. never enough curls /1740s-1750s)
WOMEN - During this time, the hair was worn in soft waves with little or no height, and in the back it was arranged in small curls, a twist or a braid pinned to the head. But, if you could encapsulate THE hairstyle of the mid century, it would be the tête de mouton, with its close-fitted style of curls in neat rows, and the powdered with white powder (remember this look from Marie Antoinette?). This style was immortalised by Madame de Pompadour, and with her dead in 1764, this style went out of fashion for the sky-high styles of the rococo.
MAN - From the 40s-60s, the hair became bigger, the Ramillies wig (tied the hair in a plait at the back) came into fashion (even though it existed before, and was prefered by military men) with its tie in the back and the curls over the ears, which became THE mens hairstyle for the 18th century, or at least the one we all easily recognise.
LATE 18TH CENTURY a.k.a. we do not know the limits of things anymore (1760s-1780s)
WOMEN - During the 1760s, the high styles began to appear, being about ¼ or ½ the length of the face. It was styled in an egg shape and was pretty much simple with the styling with a few decorations. But oh, the 1770s came, and HUGE hair became all the rage, going to 1 ½ times the length of the face, styled in the shape of an air balloon. To achieve the height cushions or toques were used: attached to the top of the head, then the hair (natural or false) was curled, waved, or frizzed, and piled over the cushion, the back of the hair was set in curls and angled towards the back of the hair, and then decorated with all kinds of things. And I mean that, all kinds of things: from bows and ribbons to ships and bird cages. These styles were worn for days or weeks at a time, and were styled into allegories of current events (vaccinations? done! air balloon? done! zodiac? done!). This style was called pouf, pouffe, or toque.
In the 1780s the volume became horizontal, instead of vertical, and out very favourite hedgehog style, or coiffure à l’enfant, was born: a halo of of frizzy curls around the face, a small hank of longer hair left straight or in ringlets. The name coiffure à l’enfant was given by Marie Antoinette’s coiffeur Léonard Autie, when she gave birth to the dauphin and she lost a lot of hair and he made this hairstyle for her (which she wears in her portrait by Louis Elisabeth Vigée-LeBrun wearing a chemise à la reine). But, like a lot in fashion, the style can be seen a few years earlier, so it’s likely that that was just the same that stuck. Even though the style of the 1780s was supposed to be more natural, the hedgehog could be really REALLY big, and fake hair was used to achieve that volume.
MEN - Men’s hair went up as well, not as high as women’s BUT certainly higher. We see the volume of the pouffe in men’s hair at the top of the head, with pigeon wings (curls over the ears) and the rest of the hair tied in the back. This is the clear origin of the 1950s Pompadour hairstyle. Power was all the rage in many colours, and wigs were desirable in white or grey, but natural colours were accepted as well, just need to powder it.
TURN OF THE CENTURY (1790s-1800s) a.k.a. oh shit, that was too much! Let’s get minimal
WOMEN - After French Revolution powder went out of fashion in France, and in England it happened in 1795 when it was taxed even though it was already used less and less. This was the start of what we know as Regency fashion, which was an absolute contrast of the silhouettes worn in most of the century. Ad hair was not different.
The hedgehog was still worn, but the volume became more natural, and the hair was decorated simply with ribbons. Another style was the hair being worn in ringlets framing the face in a more restrained way, and a chignons in the back, showing off the neck. The hair could also be cut short, like very famously Lady Caroline Lamb did, ina a style called à la Titus, that became fashionable for men and women. Very Jane Austen-esque. The colours were natural with the powder gone, and this was the beginning of the Romantic period.
MEN - The powder was out of fashion, so no more white, grey or colourful hair for men. With the discovery of Pompeii’s ruins, we see a renaissance for classical and hellenic references during the 18th century, and we see that in women’s white fashions and curls, inspired in Greek and Roman sculptures, and in men we see short hair for the first time in a LONG time, inspired by ancient senators and gods. In 1795 with the powder tax, men potested cutting their hair (I mean, no hair, no need for powder), and we see the rise of the Bedford crop (a short cropped hairstyle with curls, parted to the side, styled with wax), started by the Duke of Bedford and then followed by his friends.
The layered short curly hairstyle called à la Titus, became famous while being worn by actor François-Joseph Talma as Titus Junius Brutus in Voltaire’s “Brutus”, shocking audiences with his short natural hair, also known as the Brutus hairstyle.
Formal court dress still required a powdered wig, as well as some professions and older and military men. But, by 1812 the age of the wig was gone.
_________________________________________________________________
FINAL NOTES: If you’re using this a guide for writing/art or a reference for how to style your hair, remember that these dates are not absolute, and that the beginnings and endings of the decades have a lot of mixing styles. So, for example, you can still have a hedgehog style in the 1790s, even though it was not THE hairstyle of the decades, and of course the portraits of the time clearly show this.
Images, from top:
Marie-Anne Mancini, duchesse de Bouillon (présumé) , ca. 1700, Nicolas de Largillière.
Sir John Chardin, ca. 1703, Unknown Artist.
Self-Portrait with sister, 1715, Rosalba Carriera.
Sir John Rushout, 4th Baronet, 1716, Sir Godfrey Kneller.
Madame Isaac de Thellusson, née Sarah le Boullenger, 1725, Nicolas de Largillière.
Portrait of Léopold Clément, Hereditary Prince of Lorraine, ca. 1720, Pierre Gobert.
Portrait of Giovanna Bagnara, 1739, Pierre Subleyras.
Portrait of Jean-Gabriel du Theil, 1738-1740, Jacques André Joseph Aved.
Mademoiselle Louise Jacquet”, 1748-1752, Jean-Étienne Liotard.
Francis Greville, Baron Brooke, later 1st Earl of Warwick, 1741, Jean-Marc Nattier.
Portrait of a Girl Holding a Spaniel, 1750s, by Alexander Roslin.
Sir Henry Oxenden, ca. 1755, Thomas Hudson.
Maria Christina, Duchess of Teschen, 1766, Marcello Bacciarelli.
Portrait of Edmund Rolfe, 1761, Pompeo Batoni.
Portrait of Anne, Countess of Chesterfield 1777 - 1778, Thomas Gainsborough.
A Young Man, presumed to be ‘John Bertram’, 1773, John Smart
A Lady, 1785, John Smart.
Jean-Joseph Mounier, 1789, Jean-François Favre.
Portrait of a Lady, 1790s, Hugh Douglas Hamilton.
Portrait of Prince Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex, 1798, Guy Head.
wow kyary pamyu pamyu is a disgusting pedophile wtf
P-chan was* 12…-_- (these tweets are from 2012) and here are sources for all of these with links to her original tweets. she mentions “waiting” for him to get older, and calls him her boyfriend and admits to trying to seduce him, and picture of her sitting on his lap.
Also I would like to add that shota in Japan literally means pedophile and that this shota/loli shit is not limited to cartoon children. It affects all children!!!!!!
Ya.. and she tweeted this years after the shit with p-chan about another little boy
K.O. aka Koala