yelenavasilisa

nyc, costume design

[yelenavasilisa]

i’m back and i have a new tumblr now! hmu if you’d like to follow

[recycledmoviecostumes]

This doublet is a great example of how high definition television has greatly impacted the details of what we see.  Makeup artists, set designers and costume designers all have to be even more focused on the small details than before, because everything will be seen in detail. 

This costume was first worn by Benedick Blythe as Phoebus in the 1997 made for television production of The Hunchback. It’s a well made and good looking costume - but the fine details are not nearly as apparent as they are in the costume’s second appearance in the 2016 season of Galavant, where it was worn on Timothy Omundson as King Richard.

Costume Credit: Ottoriver

E-mail Submissions: [email protected]

Follow: Website | Twitter | Facebook | Pinterest

[muspeccoll]

This week’s #visionsofthefuture post is from Ultimo, an imaginative narration of life under the earth with projections by John Vassos and the text by Ruth Vassos.  John Vassos was an artist and industrial designer, and these images chronicle a projected future of the earth – told in past tense – after an ice age forces humanity to bore into the earth’s crust and live underground. Humans survive, but they are ultimately forced to leave the planet and search for a new home. “Thousands of light years we will traverse—will my descendants complete the copy of this document I take with me?” Ultimo, an imaginative narration of life under the earth / with projections by John Vassos and the text by Ruth Vassos.New York : E.P. Dutton, 1930. NC1075 .V35   

[shesnake]

32/? costume design: The Fifth Element by Jean-Paul Gaultier, in honour of the film’s 20th anniversary!

[globalchristendom]

Catholics pray during Silence Procession in Quito, Ecuador. The Silence Procession is held on Maundy Thursday, the Thursday before Easter, and is part of the commemoration of the Last Supper. (Photographer: Edu Leon)

[phroyd]

Sophie Scholl’s last words: 

“How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause? Such a fine sunny day, and I have to go, but what does my death matter, if through us thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?”

Phroyd

[secretgaygentdanvers]

Quote from Traudl Junge, Hitler’s private secretary from 1942-45:

Of course, the terrible things I heard from the Nuremberg Trials, about the six million Jews and the people from other races who were killed, were facts that shocked me deeply. But I wasn’t able to see the connection with my own past. I was satisfied that I wasn’t personally to blame and that I hadn’t known about those things. I wasn’t aware of the extent. But one day I went past the memorial plaque which had been put up for Sophie Scholl in Franz Josef Strasse, and I saw that she was born the same year as me, and she was executed the same year I started working for Hitler. And at that moment I actually sensed that it was no excuse to be young, and that it would have been possible to find things out. 

[atomic-chronoscaph]

The Scarlet Slaying of the Faithless Blonde - art by George Gross (c.1949)

[fripperiesandfobs]

Dress ca. 1900

From the Fashion Museum, Bath on Twitter

[yelenavasilisa]

[tockthewatchdog-deactivated2020]

i need feminism because when jesus does a magic trick it’s a goddamn miracle but when a woman does a magic trick she gets burned at the stake

fabulous 

i mean they did also kill jesus. that was a pretty significant thing that happened. like i understand where you’re coming from here but they very much did kill jesus.

[spectredelarose]

Margot Fonteyn and Rudolf Nureyev rehearsing Giselle, 1962

[riversofgold]

Daniel Craig has not been given enough credit for taking a character who was a cardboard throwback even in the 1960s and playing him straight: as a wall-eyed, traumatised thug, a protagonist who is two-dimensional precisely because he is empty inside. Craig animates the automaton that is Bond by asking just what it would take to make a person behave in this horrific way – and like any piece of well-done puppetry, the effect is sinister. Daniel Craig is the Bond we deserve, a Bond who takes seriously the job of embodying a savage yearning for a lost fantasy of the 1950s. It is about masculinity, yes, but also about Britishness, about whiteness and about heterosexuality, about the loss of certainty in all of these in a changing world.

Laurie Penny for the New Statesman. (via sashayed)

[mabellonghetti]

Beatrice Dalle, Juliette Binoche, Vanessa Paradis, Valeria Golino, Emmanuelle Beart, Sophie Marceau, Laetitia Casta, Ornella Muti, Hanna Schygulla and Monica Belluci photographed by Bettina Rheims during the 80′s and 90′s

[officialcrow]

the white girl on your dash with bad bangs and “male tears” mugs that posts “kill all men” glittertext gifs is dating this guy irl

[hucklehuckle]

question: if a man pays a woman to have sex with him is she really consenting? How is it not rape??

[leighalanna]

you said in your tags that you really want an answer, so here you go:

we consent to sex for a variety of reasons, all of which are ultimately transactional in some way.  i consent to sex with a partner because i think they have a nice butt and i want to touch it, because i think she’ll give me an orgasm, because i have a migraine and sex might help, because i love them and sex will cement or express that love.  in all of these cases, i am consenting to sex because it will net me a particular benefit (or I predict that it will) – consenting to sex because it gets you something you want is not an inherently problematic thing.  consenting to sex because the gain i hope to reap is specifically financial or material, is not ultimately different from consenting to sex because of a gain that is not those things. 

when anti-sex work feminists make an equivalence between traded sex and rape, they are also showing a fundamental misunderstanding of what the trade of sex is like.  just because i have “entered the state of being known as ‘prostitute’” does not mean that it is possible to simplistically buy my consent.  if i’m sitting in a restaurant with my friends, or doing my grocery shopping, or sitting in a theater, you can’t walk up to me, throw an hour’s-rate’s worth of bills at me and expect me to bend over and drop my panties on command.  the rate you pay me influences my decision to consent, but it does not purchase it – i consent for a nuanced spectrum of reasons: i consent to sex for x amount of money, with someone who has passed my screening, at a place and time when I decide I am working, with the methods of safer sex I prefer, the particular sex acts I am comfortable with, et cetera.  The removal of any of these conditions negates my consent – someone who pays me but removes the condom is committing rape, someone who gives me money but accosts me when I’m not working is committing rape, someone who gives me money and then ignores my boundaries about what we do together is committing rape.  This is because a client has not and can not buy my blanket consent – you can’t actually buy consent, ironically is the place where rad fems and I technically agree.  Someone who is paying me is agreeing to one of the conditions I have set on my consent to sex (and all consent is of course conditional – blanket consent to sex is a contradiction in terms).  The fact that one of my conditions is money doesn’t change anything about that. 

And, it’s not in direct answer to your question, but it’s worth talking about when this conversation comes up – when anti sex work feminists talk about sex work as being inherently and always rape, they remove the ability of sex workers to talk about actual rape and assault they experience on the job.  If all sex work is rape, then there’s no meaningful difference between my favorite client whose company I enjoy, who treats me with respect and kindness, who never goes near my boundaries, and always tips generously, and someone violently assaults me and takes my money.  And some radical feminists might say that I’m the one who doesn’t get that there’s no difference between those two people, but from here, the gulf is huge.  

[emilydwarfield]

Consent, to me, isn’t the ability to say yes but the ability to say no; my ‘yes’ is meaningless if it’s the only answer I could give. In my current working situation, I have the ability to say no to the next potential client who comes along, and that’s why it’s consensual. It hasn’t always been this way, though. Poverty absolutely constrains choices to the point that it makes consent impossible (which is, I should note, very different from negating *agency*). If an individual made me choose between having sex and being homeless, no one would hesitate to call that rape, because it’s a heavily constrained choice– it’s coercion. When I started doing survival sex work, this was essentially the scenario I was in. It was absolutely traumatic in a way consistent with past experiences of sexual abuse. I had to take every session that came to me. I quite literally could not afford to say ‘no’. Of course, there was no individual forcing me to choose between sex work and homelessness. I was raped, but there was no perpetrator, which is why it’s fair to say that no one should be criminalized. The closest there is to a ‘perpetrator’ here is our atomized neoliberal capitalist society, which is only strengthened by policing.

That’s the other thing. Even if you want to argue that all clients are morally responsible for abuse-by-poverty– which, I’d like to point out, means that all of us are responsible, since we all consume labor from coerced workers when we purchase things like t-shirts and coffee– that’s not automatically an argument for criminalization. The safety of victims and potential victims should be paramount when crafting laws, and there is overwhelming evidence that criminalization harms everyone trading sex. I’m against mandatory arrest laws for domestic violence for similar reasons: they cause more harm. Please move past this idea that policing and incarceration are the end-all-be-all when it comes to justice.

So, you were close, OP. It might very well be rape for someone to exchange money for sex, depending on the circumstances of the person receiving. But it’s not the individual paying who’s at fault; the system is at fault. Get rid of male demand and you will still have female poverty, you will have homelessness and starvation, which is absolutely abuse because we have the resources to avoid it. We just refuse to distribute resources evenly. That’s where you should be expending your energy, on changing our abusive economic system. Because all. survival. work. is. abusive.

[jetude-deactivated20190320]

This:

when anti sex work feminists talk about sex work as being inherently and always rape, they remove the ability of sex workers to talk about actual rape and assault they experience on the job. If all sex work is rape, then there’s no meaningful difference between my favorite client whose company I enjoy, who treats me with respect and kindness, who never goes near my boundaries, and always tips generously, and someone violently assaults me and takes my money. And some radical feminists might say that I’m the one who doesn’t get that there’s no difference between those two people, but from here, the gulf is huge.

Excellent description of a truly as yet unexplored aspect of women, any type of sexual expression and actual contemporary life.

BRAVA 👏🏽💌👏🏽!

[grilled-pineapple]

Woah. This made me think!

[bollywood-bloodbaths]

i love it when i’m researching shite hardcore punk bands and wondering if they’re racist and then discover they have songs called either summat like ‘we’re definitely not racist’ or ‘we are massive racists’. makes it v easily distinguishable, thanks lads

[pixendrit]

As I Was Moving Ahead Occasionally I Saw Brief Glimpses of Beauty