#representations

[sieclesetcieux]

The Monument to the Convention in the Panthéon: is it Hoche or Saint-Just?

I was having a lot of thoughts about this topic, so here we go.

Yes, a blurb on the official Panthéon website says the figure on a horse is General Hoche.

Here's a shocking truth: sometimes even official websites make mistakes.

It's quite possible the source for the Panthéon blurb is the 1911 news clipping found by @robespapier:

Here's another shocking mistake: journalists make mistakes too.

Look what he wrote:

The general on a horse is Hoche, as beautiful as a god, with his thoughtul brow and his poet eyes [...]

It's stated as evidence but it's actually his assumption. Nowhere does it say "Sicard told me so". It's the journalist's interpretation. And his interpretation is extremely bizarre because throughout the 19th century, starting all the way back to Michelet, this kind of description - "as beautiful as a god, with his thoughtul brow and his poet eyes" - matches Saint-Just.

François-Léon Sicard (1862-1934) lived his entire life fed with the romantic imagery of the French Revolution used by the Third Republic where Saint-Just became the quintessential Representative on Mission:

When it comes to a monumental statue meant to represent the spirit of the Convention nationale, you have to factor several things where myth-making and legend collide with an accurate representation of history.

Yes, one side represents the deputies and the other the military. However, the Convention nationale DID NOT heroize generals. They put the military under direct control of the Convention.

Now, is it more likely to be a general or a representative on mission?

At first glance, if you see a figure on a horse surrounded by soldiers, you'll conclude it's a general. With superficial aesthetics in mind, Hoche could fit the bill.

Hoche was important - but was it enough, among all the generals, to choose him to be represented here?

We can't know what Sicard thought, but we know his monument is meant to represent the Convention nationale. It's specifically designed to honor the legislative assembly, its members, and the triumphs achieved under its direct governance. Hoche was never a member of the Convention. He was a soldier. Moreover, choosing him among other generals might cause controversies.

It's just as likely to be depicting a Representative on Mission, as the extension of the legislative will (on the left) and of the Republic (in the middle) who is guiding the troops to victory. Because the Representatives on Mission were members of the Convention. They were part of the military machine but only as the necessary civilian/legislative supervision.

That's for the symbolism.

Next, when you study the actual iconography, you see that it's clearly not Hoche:

Note that the first image is Hoche's statue in the Panthéon, which is right next to the monument.

So, is it Saint-Just? We can't know for sure, but based on iconographical cues, it's possible. Why Saint-Just? Because of how he built his own legend on mission that Michelet then cemented to our very days.

However, here's an alternative explanation that can satisfy everyone:

The figure on a horse might be both.

He might be meant to be a Generic General or a Generic Representative on Mission. It might be intentional that you can choose to interpret him as either Hoche or Saint-Just. Because depictions of the French Revolution, especially state-sponsored ones, have always been extremely controversial, prone to scandal and polarization. Example: the Bicentenial movie.

French Republican memory has always been a fierce political and emotional battle. The ambiguity might be specifically designed to reconcile both types of Republicans - those who glorify the generals and those who celebrate the representatives on mission - rather than divide. It's very possible that this debate we're having is written in the very origin of the monument itself. That Sicard never said who it was, the journalist assumed it was Hoche, and Sicard didn't correct him. We might never know, unless we find a document by Sicard that identifies the figures exactly.

Ultimately, the most reasonable interpretation might be what you, as the observer, decide it depicts, not what the artist intended.

[csms-jpg]

Everything around you

[fieriframes]

[All representations of a thing are inherently abstract.]

[tlg-confessions]

we as a fandom do not talk enough about the poor representations of african and indian culture in the franchise. speaking as a poc I don’t care if we can’t expect them to have total accurate representation; the least they could do is consult the indigenous people whom they’re supposed to represent. and no, it doesn’t matter that the characters aren’t human. although not the best, you can still see the cultural influences within the media. heck, even a non-fan could see them. I don’t know a lot about african culture myself, but I’m sure that if you ask someone from the regions where the lion king and guard take place, they’ll tell you of the inaccuracies; be it in pronunciations, be it in the animals themselves, be it in the spiritual concepts. how do I know this? because they got it wrong with the tree of life. first of all, as pointed out by others before, they could have chosen a different species than lions. second, their names. I usually think of it as something funny and lighthearted but come on. queen rani? queen queen??? and nirmala’s ‘aram karo’ just.. sigh. not only did they do a literal translation and therefore makes no sense, but they arent even pronouncing it right. if you were to talk to someone whose spoken hindi all their life, they’d say “calm down” would be “shant ho jao” or “shanti”. how do I know this? because I am that person. the pronunciations of their names are also so off and, for lack of a better description, WHITE, that it makes me feel icky. I don’t even WANT to know how bad they’re getting the swahili representation and pronunciations.

forget canon, even fandom does this sometimes. I’m not about to police people on how they get to portray the tlk/tlg characters in human form, but I think it should go without saying that we at least recognise and understand that these characters are from africa and india. say it. say it out loud. speak of it and speak of the racism within the franchise.

lastly I’d like to say I don’t mean to target anyone by saying this; this particular issue was just brought to my notice by a friend recently, though I have talked about this and representation in the franchise before. I am also not targetting the voice actors since at the end of the day all they’re doing is their job. thanks for reading if you did. /all informative tone.

.

[smashorpassobjects2]

Smash or Pass: A Photograph of Your Favorite/Beloved Object (NOT The Object Itself)

Smash

Pass

Voting ended onFeb 2, 2025

[kookies2000]

Maybe it's the Mexican in me, but I can't stress enough how good Blue Beatle was. Is it a simple origin? Yes. What makes it different from the others? Again, the Mexican in me speaking, it was pure fun and heart. More than most hero origin stories. I 100% related to the racism in this film, from people refusing to pronounce your name and say your last name instead. And there's still a 50/50 of them mispronouncing that, too. Or the amounts of people at work that walk past me thinking I don't speak English. Which usually ends with them trying to speak to a blond, white or black employee, only for them to not speak English and send the customer back to me. Or when a lady was recording me because she most likely thought I kidnapped my little sisters. Or how I keep getting mistaken as the babysitter for my white passing sisters. It's a good list, really.

And a lot of the sad moments can be cheesy, but dang it, it got me because it's accurate to how my family was treated in America. People like to think racism towards Latinos isn't a big deal anymore, but it is. Especially in the upper class, like the movie portrayed.

And when they showed El Chapulin Colorado, I felt great. He's an original slap stick superhero that was created in Mexico. Created by a well-known and respected man in Mexico City named Roberto Mario Gómez Bolaños or also known as Chespirito. And just the mention of El Chapulin Colorado made me happy because he is the first and original Mexican hero, not Blue Beatle.

In other words, this film has so much respect for Mexican and Latino culture and doesn't treat us like a joke. If you're Latino, Hispanic, or want to be an ally to our community, seeing Blue Beatle is definitely a start. For understanding our struggles and supporting Latinos in the entertainment industry. Pushing for more representation for us and having people understand us more.

[fern-spotting]

Columbo S10E4 “Death Hits the Jackpot” (1991)

Fern...spotted at 3:25? Do we think a print of a drawing counts?

Not happy with that? Well, how's a painting of a fern?

Finally, at a funeral, we get a real, albeit cut, fern.

Finally, because I'm stubborn, here's a real, live, uncut Boston fern in the ultimate combo, at 1:22:46.