At the Gallery: Fran Lloyd Wright by ~Nadesiko


Frank Lloyd Wright by ~Nadesiko on deviantART

I’m getting a jump start on Frank Lloyd Wright Month!

Spot On Etsy — Odd Mod Out “Peacocks” Treasury

So, I decided that I liked the cross-over of Treasuries and blog posts, so I figured I’d make one while I’m still working on other character treasuries. This one is themed around peacock imagery and colours.

These are all pretty self-explanatory, I think, but if I notice a lot of comments from people who have no idea why I’d include these things, I’ll return to my former format of a simple thumbnail and description.

I’ve also updated my own Etsy shoppe with the following badges:

And the following items from my shoppe have been added to the following treasuries:

The “Tyranny & Rubble” Treasury was also apparently part of a non-team challenge, prompted by the blog Treasury Challenge NonTeam. I’m perusing this and think I might take up a future challenge.

Sunday at the Gallery

Erte, Charleston couple; c1926?

Erte, Charleston couple; c1926?

Erte: Ruby, Leo


The glowing ruby shall adorn,
Those who in July are born;
Then they’ll be exempt and free
From love’s doubts and anxiety.


Pindar, Isthmian Ode 6. 46 ff (trans. Conway) (Greek lyric C5th B.C.) :
“May his body’s frame be no less hardy than this wild creature’s skin that rides upon my [Herakles’] shoulder now–the beast I slew long since, first of my labours, in Nemea.”

Spot On Etsy Tuesday

My new badge this week is for the kind of weird guy who goes over people’s heads.

oh god,
why
am I so much more sensitive than everybody else ?
why
do I feel things so much more acutely than them,
and understand so much more.
I bet I’m the first person who’s ever felt as rotten as this.
could it be
that I’m going to grow up
to be a great poet and thinker, and all those other wankers in my class
are going to have to work in factories or go on the dole?
yes, I think it could.

This Lenox porcelain suite is just stunning. Hrmm… I seem to say that a lot about things…. Well, this time it’s especially true. I’d suggest the design is sort of a fusion of Art Deco and Art Nouveau —far too fluid to be true to Deco form, but not quite flourished enough to be true to Art Nouveay form.

These Cesar Stoffi-designed candlesticks are an Atompunk must-have! Or even Dieselpunk, they do sort of look a bit gearish.

And speaking of Atomic-age looks, i have to agree with the seller that this button does have something of an Atompunk look / feel to it. And such a lovely shade of blue; compliments the brasstone beautifully.

And speaking of lovely shades of blue, these earrings, made from beetle wings, and are simply gorgeous in their simple design. Also, the seller is based in my native city. :-D

Well, I’m kind of feeling a tad overwhelmed looking for stuff to post this week, but I think next week is going to be a theme of one of my (p)Etsy peeves.

The Great Gatsby

You’ve just watched the trailer to the lost silent film, The Great Gatsby, released in 1926. If you’re critical of the fact that novels give way to hasty film versions at a supposedly alarming rate in the last decade, keep in mind that the novel was published in 1925. Film historians, basing their belief on reviews, are generally of the opinion that the lost silent was the most faithful film adaptation of the book, but personally, I really love the 1974 film —and anyway, short of another freak find of film cans in a grain silo or something, this trailer is all that survives of the silent.

Great love story of our time? Oh, Mr Trailer Narrator… Did you even watch the film? I mean, I’m not denying there’s a love story in there, but it’s not what you think it is.

The 1974 film starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow (I always love Farrow’s performances, and in this she was as perfect as one could imagine) is fair enough. Upon its release, it was praised for sticking closely to the novel, but oddly criticised for failing to portray The Jazz Age through Nostalgia Goggles —but considering the philosophical themes of the story, wouldn’t something thouroughly stteped in nostalgia sort of miss the point? I swear, sometimes I want to take a cricket bat to film critics (one of the few I regularly find myself agreeing with being Doug Walker of That Guy With the Glasses —but then, hating Moulin Rouge! [NOT the 1953 biopic of Toulouse-Laurtrec starring Jose Ferrer on his knees portraying the 5’1″ descendent of inbred French aristocracy, but the jukebox musical with the exclamation point in the title —which also features an ostensibly Puerto Rican actor as the French painter, this time John Leguizamo, who is given a similar digital treatment to make Elijah Wood and Sean Astin into Hobbits] as much as I did is never a bad thing).

The Great Gatsby is F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic story about a man who does everything he can to attract the attentions of high society, especially one woman in particular, seems to, and at one point, feels he has made it to the top, only to learn that the woman he’s pined for (and the Old Money society he’s tried to impress) is still unimpressed with his working class / white collar criminal background (he’s a bootlegger during the Prohibition era), and will never love and accept him. Gatsby’s character is sort of a satirical inverse of Trimalchio, a character in the ancient Roman novel Satyricon (and Trimalchio was Fitzgerald’s preferred title for the novel, but his agent advised against it), and the novel itself is more a classic satire of the socio-economic class system as much as it is a tragedy of the titular character.

I first became a bit excited to learn of a 2012 remake of the film —and then I learned that the film due for a 2012 release is directed by the same man who directed William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge!, two films where the only thing I praiset is use of songs performed by Gavin Friday in the soundtrack albums. I am not confident that this will be a decent film.

Just going by the trailer: It looks like everything that sort of worked about the other two films is present in this one, and yet the trailer leads me to believe that it’ll be subjected to the same music-video style editing, where you can’t actually appreciate the visuals and design, and (just as I hated about Romeo + Juliet), it’s trying too hard to be “dark and edgy”, where what works about the story is the juxtaposition of shallow lightheartedness with virtue and misguided determination. This is not a story about being brooding and “edgy”, it’s a story about doing everything one can to be at the top and impress people, only to end up without happiness —and this is not adequately satirised with a Romeo + Rouge! “dark and edgy” atmosphere. The trailer suggests that this is one of those films that’s going to have a few nice points (which one may not be able to fully appreciate because it looks and feels like a music video) but which misses all the nuances of the source material, which is what makes it so engrossing and thus adds to the timelessness of the piece.

But hey: Shit sandwich? Tastes great! I doubt there are going to be very many people who will realise how shitty this film even seems from the trailer, and so will flock the the cinema, their minds already made up that “nice title card + obligatory Baz Lurhmann dark atmoss with random sparkly shit = OMG! REESE’S-MASTERPIECES!!!”, and this will thus be public opinion of an objectively bad film that can essentially buy a good review.

1920s nostalgia of the 1960s and 1970s


The Boy Friend is probably Ken Russell’s best musical. Modified from the original stage script from 1954 (which was a comic send-up of Rodgers & hart’s 1926 musical The Girl Friend) to be presented in a similar “play within the film” format Russell revisited with Salome’s Last Dance from 1988, though this is far more complex. Set at an unspecified year (though judging from the clothing and such, I’d guess about 1926-28-ish for the approximate date Russell was going for), it’s generally pretty accurate as a tribute to the Jazz Age and the height of Art Deco popularity in design and costuming.


Thoroughly Modern Millie is cute, but very much anachronistic of the 1960s, visually, in ways that make Russell’s film clearly superior. I swear, half these costumes are modified from Mary Quant designs —which would be a good thing, if making a film about 1967 (the year of its release), but not for a film set in 1922. The women’s hair is all 1960s. The men’s hair is all 1960s. Unlike The Boy Friend, at least half of the music is taken from the 1910s and 1920s (though some from later than 1922), but performed in a manner closer to 1960s tastes.

All in all, I like both films, but for different reasons. Julie Andrews clearly is the better singer/dancer/actress than Twiggy, Millie is lighter and more overtly comedic and more specifically spoofing nostalgic and modern sentiments, which is certainly better suited to certain moods (though in general, I tend to prefer “artier” and more serious fare, even in comedies), and Carol Channing is always memorable and entertaining. On the other hand, Ken Russell did his homework for the look and feel of the Boyfriend, and while clearly making the story more complex and serious, also created the superior atmosphere for a genuine tribute to the 1920s. It’s the difference between “film as art” and “film as broadly humorous commentary”, and overall, both hold up pretty well, but by personal opinion, I think Russell’s film is better, cos it’s closer to my own personal tastes.

Sunday at the Gallery: Midnight Zephyr 2000 by Michael Kungl


prints available here

(Yes, this post pre-written and scheduled to post about now.)