
祝日 / Permanent Vacation
tumblr dot com
d e v o n
trying on a metaphor

blake kathryn

Origami Around

No title available

#extradirty
Today's Document
YOU ARE THE REASON

JVL

JBB: An Artblog!
🪼

No title available
noise dept.

pixel skylines

oozey mess

Discoholic 🪩

No title available
Sweet Seals For You, Always

seen from Türkiye
seen from Malaysia

seen from Egypt
seen from Poland

seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from India
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Russia
@windowandaisle-blog
The dap, the fist bump, the black power handshake. It goes by many names and carries many meanings. Photographer LaMont Hamilton is devoting his research fellowship with us to unearthing stories about the dap for his project Five on the Black Hand Side.
Read about the dap’s history and evolution on Talk Story: http://bit.ly/1odnKKM.
they called the “terrorist fist jab” on fox
The dap originated during the late 1960s among black G.I.s stationed in the Pacific during the Vietnam War. At a time when the Black Power movement was burgeoning, racial unrest was prominent in American cities, and draft reforms sent tens of thousands of young African Americans into combat, the dap became an important symbol of unity and survival in a racially turbulent atmosphere. Scholars on the Vietnam War and black Vietnam vets alike note that the dap derived from a pact black soldiers took in order to convey their commitment to looking after one another. Several unfortunate cases of black soldiers reportedly being shot by white soldiers during combat served as the impetus behind this physical act of solidarity.
Such events, combined with the racism and segregation faced by black G.I.s, created a pressing need for an act and symbol of unity. The dap, an acronym for “dignity and pride” whose movements translate to “I’m not above you, you’re not above me, we’re side by side, we’re together,” provided just this symbol of solidarity and served as a substitute for the Black Power salute prohibited by the military.
White soldiers and commanding officers deemed the handshake a threat under the misconception that the dap was a coded language of potential black insurrection. In fact the dap was also a coded form of communication between soldiers that conveyed necessary information for survival, such as what to expect at the battlefront or what had transpired during an operation. The dap was banned at all levels of the military, and thus many black soldiers were court-martialed, jailed, and even dishonorably discharged as a punishment for dapping. Military repression of the dap further cemented a desire for a symbol of solidarity and protection among black men.
David Zapparoli, You Are Just A Child (1992)
Hayao Miyazaki on life
Then hit them, one by one.
Time to teach the kiddos how it's done...
Allen Jones
Secretary
1972
You’re All Using The Term ‘Throwing Shade’ Wrong and Need to Stop Immediately
"The limits of my language," wrote Ludwig Wittgenstein in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, ”means the limits of my world.” I was exposed to this quote as a freshman in college, and I understood immediately what it meant: words, phrases, and idioms have very, very particular meanings. Every construction we employ in our daily conversations has a whole body of history behind it, and that history defines how we use different phrases and aphorisms, what they mean, and what they might mean to us in the future. I cite my single experience with Wittgenstein for only one reason, really (well, two, if you count wanting to sound like an insufferably pretentious asshole, which I do): to justify why I’m so put off by how people use the term ‘throwing shade’ online.
(above: usage of ‘throw shade’ and ‘throwing shade’ on Twitter in the past four weeks) 'Throwing shade,' as defined by the authoritative online repository for modern language of the Internet age (the Urban Dictionary), seems like a relatively straight-forward term: “to talk trash about a friend or acquaintance, to publicly denounce or disrespect,” or, more colloquially, “to hate on someone for acting a fool.” The phrase has been in use since at least the early 1980s, but the term has only really enjoyed a serious revival in the past year, peaking two weeks ago with the Gawker article “Watch Michelle Obama Throw World-Historical Shade at John Boehner" which captures Michelle Obama flashing a stink-eye at Speaker Boehner on Inauguration Day
(above: search volume on Google for ‘throwing shade,’ January 2008 through January 2013)
Many commenters noted that the use of the term was incorrect:
While it is a lively term “throwing shade” is not appropriate here. In this instance Michelle is definitely interacting with an Enemy whom she chooses to ignore with prejudice because she is classy and wonderful and because John Boehner is not worth the energy it takes to turn one’s head. John Boehner is the Enemy of All the Free People of Middle Earth and Michelle has no other recourse than to ignore his Necromancerty.
Throwing shade is a perfectly wonderful term of gay-vogue era that Gawker keeps desperately trying to revive with honorable intentions but incorrect usage
My Twitter feed is now full of people who didn’t read into the comments field (pro tip: always read the comments), have no idea what the term means, and use it interchangeably with ‘shit-talk’ or ‘hate on.’ But, as my gay and lesbian friends have pointed out to me, the proper use of the ‘throwing shade’ requires a bit more understanding.
The origins of the term ‘throwing shade’ can be traced to LGBT ball culture in the 1980s. One of the earliest explanations of the phrase appears in Paris Is Burning, a 1990 documentary by Jennie Livingston that chronicles New York City ball culture during mid-to-late 1980s and the African America, latino, gay and transgender communities involved in it. Drag queen Dorian Corey explains the evolution of the term:
"If I’m a black queen, and you’re a black queen, we can’t call each other black queens. That’s not a read that is just a fact. So we talk about your ridiculous shape, your saggy face, your tacky clothes. then reading became a developed form where it became shade. Shade is, ‘I don’t tell you you’re ugly, but I don’t have to tell you because you know you’re ugly.’ And that’s shade."
'Throwing shade,' then, is significantly more nuanced than conventional, aggressive shit-talking. Desson Howe was careful to draw out this distinction in his 1991 review of Paris is Burning for The Washington Post
Corey explains other voguing terminology, such as “reading” and “throwing shade.” To read is to insult imaginatively — in opposition to the blunt gay-bashing taunts of the straight world. Reading is gay-to-gay sparring. Thus, when two black queens call each other “black queen,” says Corey, “that’s not a read, that’s just a fact.”
Throwing shade is reading at a refined level; it’s the curve to the pitch. If someone says they won’t call you ugly because you already know, well, you just got thrown a shade. When enmity reaches fever point and pride is involved, it’s time for voguing. This is direct competition, when contenders take their fight to the ball floor: the equivalent of jousting, dueling or stepping outside the bar.
You’ll notice that throwing shade is defined in opposition to the directness and cruelty of gay-bashing. It’s more artfully executed, more dependent on constructing a veiled (or not-so-veiled) insult rather than relying on obvious crudities and innuendo. Throwing shade requires wielding your words like a rapier rather than a cudgel. So why the sudden resurgence? The second coming of ‘throwing shade’ is likely rooted in the mainstreaming of gay culture, but its widespread usage is more easily tied to the popularity of RuPaul’s Drag Race. The show, featuring renowned drag queen RuPaul, premiered on Logo in February 2009, coinciding almost perfectly with an uptick in Google searches for ‘throwing shade’ (as noted above). But despite the show’s popularity, most outlets continue to conflate throwing shade with the basic act of shit-talking (as MSNBC did after Michelle Obama’s now-infamous eye-roll). Even The Daily Beast, in a fucking post describing the ‘RuPaul’s Drag Race Dictionary’ in 2011, oversimplified the term:
throwing shade (v.): the art of insulting (see also read)
Example: “Oh, honey. I need to duck and cover because you all bitches be throwing beaucoup shade.”—RuPaul in Season 2
RuPaul explains it *much* better herself on Drag Race (the clip, available at The Daily Beast, won’t embed on Tumblr for some reason). You don’t need Wittgenstein to get your words right. if you’re thinking about ‘throwing shade,’ or even describing something as ‘throwing shade,’ heed RuPaul’s advice:
Katharine Hepburn skateboarding.
100% Certain your name won't matter
Success is a label that the world confers on you, but mastery is an ever-onward ‘almost.’
Sarah Lewis, author of the indispensable The Rise: Creativity, the Gift of Failure, and the Search for Mastery, in conversation with Anna Deavere Smith at the New York Public Library.
For more of Lewis’s insights on the difference between success and mastery, read this.
(via explore-blog)
It’s been 10 years since Alchemy Architects built their iconic WeeHouse on the prairies of Minnesota, inspiring your faithful editors and helping kick off the modern tiny house craze.
What's your position about internships? Are they rather an experience inherent to design practice or a way for employers to get cheap labour? Would you consider having interns one day?
I don’t have a holistic view on this complicated subject. What I can offer are some fragmented thoughts —some of these points may be gross oversimplifications or contradictory because again, as I have said, I have yet to come up with an all encompassing or nuanced opinion.
— You cannot compare an internship in most cases to a traditional Mentor-Apprentice model where an apprentice trains and develops skill under the watchful eyes of a Master, as similar as they seem.
— The traditional Mentor-Apprentice model has its merits and has repeatedly proven itself in the history of Craft. This model is not dependent on capitalism.
— The internship model differs from the Mentor-Apprentice in a few ways, most importantly its existence is a direct consequence of capitalism.
— In the general sense, an internship exists to fill in the gaps left uncovered from the modern art education. 90% of the gaps are products of capitalism—the do’s and don’ts of client relations, optimized workflows, adjusting an office environment, etc.
— Most, if not, all internships do not live up to the requirements or the spirit of a Mentor-Apprentice model which require extreme dedication from both parties and an intimacy level rarely achieved in a studio or agency environment.
—It is because of this that many internships end up become cheap labor.
— The education in internships is largely split into two main categories: indirect learning, and commanded learning.
— An example of Indirect Learning: The intern learns about a few Photoshop shortcuts while observing a junior designer at work.
— Commanded Learning: The intern learns about how to print out a PDF and display it properly on foam boards at the studio because it is their standard practice and a presentation is coming up. The intern has been told to do this because the job needs to be done.
— I am fine with engaging in market values and capitalism but I believe that appealing to a young student’s hunger and passion as an excuse to exploit them is unethical.
— I believe an overt awareness that an internship is part of capitalism helps in separating reality from the false idea that an internship is an inherent rite of passage because all too often it excuses exploitation.
— I have done many things for free because the compensations and benefits of the project outside of the financial were deemed worthy. But that is a personal decision and one I evaluate on a per-project-basis. A business entity cannot make you come to that conclusion and implying that it is a dangerous grey area.
— Internships can hurt mobility especially to students of color and those from low-income backgrounds.
— The practice of keeping long-term interns (over 6 months) makes it harder to justify the existence of entry-level salaried jobs. Furthermore, there is a rising trend of graduates completing 3 or more internships after school before finding employment because the role and responsibilities of interns have grown faster than the traditional agency model.
— Unpaid internships contribute to structural unemployment and recessions as much as they are caused by them. “An increased supply of free labor tends to displace full-time workers and increase unemployment, which contributes to worsening economic conditions and failing to reach one of the macroeconomic goals of full employment.” (Source)
— Unless college credit can be obtained, I will personally not take on any interns until I can afford to provide that person an admittedly less than glamorous, but ultimately livable wage. I would instead, contract that student as a freelancer.
— If we must accept the notion that internship is an inherent part of a design practice then we can only conclude that the main benefactor should the student and not the studio. This thought should be the driving force behind each decision from the studio. Who is really benefitting from asking the intern to stay late tonight to finish a job?
— If college credit can be obtained, but I cannot afford to give the prospective intern a livable wage, I will pay them minimum wage (if allowed by their institution) while treating it as a college course. They come in 1-2 times a week, and I would dedicate 3-5 hours per visit my full attention to them. We can take on client work or we can go to a museum and talk about life. If internships are a rite of passage then an internship is not as much about someone helping me as it is about me helping them.
“The passage into mystery always refreshes. If, when we work, we can look once a day upon the face of mystery, then our labor satisfies. We are lightened when our gifts rise from pools we cannot fathom. Then we know they are not a solitary egotism and they are inexhaustible.”
—Lewis Hyde, The Gift: Creativity and the Artist in the Modern World, (Vintage Books, New York, 2007) p. 25
Photograph: Ryan Page from Past, Present, Future