Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

May 23 2018

5518 13a7 420


my good good pals

I speak to the broken halves of all our selves and tell them to embrace, loving the worst in us equally with the best.
— J. M. Coetzee, Dusklands

May 22 2018

2850 57fb 420


Coe and poppies

2930 f1ea 420


Heghera + cow parsnip


cinderella: redo


so i was watching cinderella while doing my nails and waiting for them to dry which was clearly a Mistake because now i can’t help but think -

the evil stepmother was always evil, okay. say her abuse of her own daughters was different than that of cinderella’s - but it was still abuse. giving them impossible expectations, telling them they were never good enough, never pretty enough, never smart enough. and then she gets married, and anastasia and drizella are ecstatic because this man seems kind and warm and maybe just maybe he can temper their mother, maybe with him around she won’t be so cruel. so they’re on their very best behavior in the beginning, they do just as their mother taught - they trot out their best upper court manners in an attempt to get their new stepfather to like them. but it just comes off as cold and snooty and they’re trying, they are, they’re just bad at it. and they see how he is with cinderella, the smiling girl their own age, and they are jealous. they don’t mean to be, they try not to be, they know it isn’t becoming of young ladies. but she gets hugs and kisses and affection and they get rulers slapped on their hands when they reach for desert and sharp jabs to their sides when they slouch and - soon they hate cinderella, not for anything she’s done, but for what she has and they dont

but then her father dies. and it’s all a tumble of things and cinderella is crying and they’ve lost their only chance at escaping their mother’s clutches and it’s terrible. and everything settles and there’s no reason to be jealous anymore but resentment is hard to let go of and they don’t know what to do. they’re only kids too after all. and they’re so terribly bad at comforting people, they can do flowery words and know all the right bows but cinderella is so sad and they just don’t know what to do with that, because they’re supposed to be sisters but they’re not even friends

and slowly but surely their mother starts abusing cinderella, starts making her a maid in her own home, and she’s their mother, what are anastasia and drizella supposed to do? she rules them with an iron fist, and cinderella doesn’t even like them anyway, it’s none of their business.

except one night anastasia crawls into her sister’s bed in the middle of the night and wakes her up. “i was thirsty,” she explains, eyes wide and shiny, and they’re bad at this with other people but drizella has no problems with pulling anastasia into her arms. the younger girl clutches her sister and continues, “i was thirsty and i went down to the kitchen to get some water and - and cinderella is still up! she’s doing the dishes, and she should be asleep, mom is going to make her make breakfast in the morning and -” she cuts herself off with a hiccup and whispers, “it’s not fair.”

“life isn’t fair,” drizella says, echoing one of their mother’s favorite phrases. but her sister is staring at her with wet eyes, and it’s not like their mother is likely to get up before sunrise anyway, she hates waking up, so she pulls herself and anastasia out of bed and off they go.

Keep reading

2989 ad07 420


Wood Alchemy Gallery by Yanni Rigos

3012 3b14 420


Found some hands tutorial by me

Not in English but hope it will help???????





not to be a downer but your twenties are super hard and super lonely and tv lied and it’s not glamorous at all and if you are having a hard time it’s ok and it’s normal and you’ll be ok

But hey, honestly? Your thirties will probably be a lot better. TV lied to you, your life doesn’t end in your thirties and you’ll probably be more financially stable and give a lot fewer fucks about pretty much everything.

All I’m living for tbh

3029 985c 420


Don’t forget about me.

I’m Max, @faithcael is Chloe, and we’reHarikaw & Faithcael cosplay on FB

Photo taken by Garnet Angeldust Photographie

3043 5b04 420






im begging of you please dont take my man

3051 db5b 420


tumblr’s update summaries changed abruptly after September 6, 2017 when they apparently fired whoever was in charge of writing them

6728 d8dc 420

May 21 2018



take your joy where you can

find things that make you laugh – being with friends or watching cat videos or remembering that stupid joke someone told in high school, it doesn’t matter, you get the endorphins all the same

try to be kind

it is a very, very hard world we live in, and while i’m not certain it’s any more or less hard than any other era in history i’m pretty sure that no previous generations were able to see as much and know as much as we can, and sometimes that makes things feel a whole lot worse

i have no idea if everything’s going to be okay, or even what that looks like. maybe being okay exists in the moments of laughing, of carrying on with some commitment to kindness, in the face of everything that’s horrible around us

i like it because it’s something i can control, it’s something i can do. i can’t stop the next shooting. i can’t heal the damage caused by the tar sands. i can choose to be kind. i can pursue things that bring me joy. it may be selfish, but i’d rather be selfish in joy than apathy. i’ve been rolling with a lot of the latter, lately, but i know what actually makes me feel better at the end of the day

6736 2738 420







my primary reaction to infinity war is like…. wow. under hypercapitalism we literally can’t imagine any other fables about resource scarcity, huh?

i’m not even talking about only thanos. every time thanos said his plan to kill half the galaxy (because it’s “finite,” lol ok one-semester-of-econ guy) the other characters were like “no!” or “you can’t!” or “that’s madness!” instead of… counter-arguing, or saying anything like “couldn’t you just… double the resources with a snap of your fingers?” obviously, nobody wants thanos to murder all those people, but it’s also as if everyone tacitly accepts his framing of the problem. “i want to kill half the universe because of resource scarcity,” he says, and everyone says “no, that’s too cruel!!” instead of “wait… wait just a fucking second there, paul ryan.” they don’t even have a line like that even when they’re talking amongst themselves, just musing at how twisted his worldview is, that he can only imagine infinite power as an infinite power to kill. no time is spent imagining an alternative.

and i can’t help but think about how we in the quote-unquote “first world” treat the resource consumption of the so-called “developing world.” we, who have enjoyed the pleasures and benefits of fridges and air conditioning and televisions and cars and convenience food and all that shit for generations: we look at the growing energy & plastics consumption of the developing world and go “uh oh, they’re really running the tab up over there, we can’t let this happen, think of the…. trees!!!” we have the audacity to act like people living in poverty in the tropics wanting window fans is selfish and short-sighted for the environment, and meanwhile we use and waste all the energy and resources we can get ahold of, like a continent full of montgomery burnses.

infinity war could have taken thanos’s approach to scarcity somewhere bigger: somewhere that was useful as a parable for our hypocrisy. the way that ragnarok was brave enough to make a parable of empire; the way that black panther could explore diaspora and identity; the way that the winter soldier actually had something to say about the surveillance-terror state. but for all the moving pieces of infinity war, i don’t think it knew where its central ethic rested. certainly, its characters showed the desire to preserve and protect life. but that’s true of any superhero film.

what it comes down to for me, is that it’s not enough for this movie’s theme to be “let’s protect people, because killing people is bad!” or even, sorry steve, “we don’t trade lives.” it’s not enough. thanos basically says, “there’s one bowl of soup and one spoon and two hungry people, so one of them has to die.” so what i needed was someone to openly reject that whole proposition. not just “no, you shouldn’t kill trillions,” but “no, that is fucking ludicrous, i reject that worldview. i reject human life as a brutal competition. group survival, even in the face of scarcity or hardship, is exactly what the fuck we developed culture for.” like, we could use that message. that message, delivered palatably in a blockbuster action movie, could do some good.

but it wasn’t really in there. maybe in little bits, in pieces. maybe. so i’m sure we’re going to have to endure a bunch of “welllll, thanos was a bad guy, but he did have a point about scarcity” metas. because we’re still failing to see how asking other people to die so that the rest can enjoy plenty is itself exactly the fucking problem on this bitch of an earth

i will acknowledge that gamora comes the closest to doing this. gamora comes down on thanos for slaughtering half her planet. but!! but! then thanos gets this horrible line about how the children who grew up after his genocide got to have “full bellies” and the planet’s a “utopia” now. and what does gamora get to say back to that? nothing! she doesn’t get a line after that! she looks angry and grief-stricken, but the writers don’t give her a single fucking thing to say in disagreement!! like, how about: “growing up as a traumatized survivor of genocide isn’t very fucking utopian????” the writers couldn’t imagine that fucking line?

Yay I’m not the only one who thought, “Oh no, at some point I’m going to inevitably run into some jackhole trying to defend Thanos as having a point…”, and “OR you could just create more resources and distribute them equitably?”

I was so fucking pissed about that, because we KNOW what happens to cultures when substantial percentages of the population are eradicated by famine or disease or war. It is not a good time! It is not twenty years later and everyone’s well fed! Because if you eradicate 50% of a population, you destroy labour, you destroy infrastructure, you screw absolutely everything for the survivors.

THIS! Halving the population vs doubling the population hypothetically has the SAME DAMN EFFECT on population growth. Unless Thanos’ actual goal was to cripple the population in the way the previous post mentions.

And don’t think for a fucking minute that Thanos is not an unreliable source for what’s happening on Gamora’s planet.

The longer this movie sits, the angrier I get. I will not be seeing it a second time in theaters.

I haven’t seen any of those movies, but this strikes me as a Necessary Take on a villain in 2018 spouting college-student overpopulation rhetoric.

I am not a fan of college-student overpopulation rhetoric.

I am … Even less a fan of this big-budget franchise choosing it as a motive in 2018.

There have been many genocides in human history, and not one of those populations has bounced back with a cheery “Gosh, with all THOSE fuckers gone, I can finally stuff my face with croissants and accumulate wealth!”

The only way that killing some people results in other people getting more stuff is if you kill the people who hoard disproportionate amounts of The Most Stuff, and take their stuff on behalf of people who have less stuff. And that is called a Revolution, and that is frowned upon and considered antisocial in most circumstances. Stuff is distributed unequally. It’s a fact. Killing half of people does not magically free up 50% more stuff.

I don’t know how seriously people take the “finite amount of energy in the universe” thing, but it’s something that creationists attempt to use to bully everyone else. The idea is that it makes evolution seem improbable, “because entropy.” Under creationism, “entropy” means “things inevitably getting worse” and it fits in well with their view of the world. They think it’s physics. Creationists say “energy in a system dissipates”, and ask how life could evolve and be complex without God to power it.

The gentle stock response is that Earth is not a closed system. It receives a constant source of energy. This energy comes from the Sun. We have a direct conduit to a sufficient amount of energy to power the life force of the planet, in terms of Making And Eating Stuff. The Sun shines on the Earth, it grows the plants, and everything eats the plants or each other. (All of the other stuff happening on Earth is basically recreation.) but while the Sun will one day burn out, the plants do not eat up the Sun. Even if every square inch of the sinful earth was covered in greedy trees and cabbages, the Sun would continue to shine on it. That’s the energy source. It’s. The Sun. It’s usually up there somewhere.

So, like, if people are justifying genocide with “oh well, there was limited energy in the universe” then, like, do these Marvel movies take place somewhere without anyone having heard of the Sun? Does their planet have a plug leading out the back, that’s plugged into a big pot of fossil fuels? Does everyone have a mild concussion that makes teenage-philosophy-Discourse sound edgy and deep? Is the Sun in their universe actually just a Chris in a very large hat? This piece of lore worries and vexes me


6745 536f 420


The Witch’s House in Beverly Hills, built in 1921. 

6760 104b 420













I can’t. Every single sentence in this could not be more wrong if the author deliberately set out to be the wrongest person in wrongville. I just. 

I don’t care what else might be useful in this book, if your introduction is as fundamentally incorrect as this, the reliability of everything else you’ve ever said and that your editor has ever touched is immediately thrown into question. 

Monochromatic MY ASS. 

I… that is… such bullshit. Wool and silk are arguably the easiest fibers to dye. Cotton’s a stone bitch to color. (Let’s not even get into ‘change clothes irregularly’, that’s bullshit too.)

I know, right?? Protein fibres suck up dye like no-one’s business; it’s cellulose that hates it. 

And as for the others… linen bedsheets, bitch. And linen and silk woven so finely as to be practically transparent. And I’d like to take my records of inventories with 100+ linen shifts for one person, because of multiple-changes-per-day, and shove them up his grant. 

It’s like he assumes that without cotton we also wouldn’t have, like, modern inventions and techniques? “Wool is hard to clean” I mean yeah you have to use Woolite on the gentle cycle and air dry but that’s not that much harder than using normal detergent

wool being excellent to dye is its other great selling poin besides warmth- which is why ‘black sheep’ became a derogatory term, as black wool could not be dyed and thus was worth less as it would only ever be dark grey

historical perspective on the fabric alternate reality he proposes- linen was durable but not easy to dye, but you largely didnt care as it was undergarments or bedsheets where you wont be publicly showing off the linens- who other then nobility cares if their bedsheets are vibrantly colored? the reason you wore linen undergarments is that they breathe and protect you from any itchyness (wool that had been properly treated by a fuller {one of the worst jobs in history} would not have been very itchy either) of thick wool clothings and to keep you from getting sweaty or stinky, not to show off your bright red skivvies. linen is still freaking awesome, its comfortable, durable, breathes. i wish i had linen undies instead of cotton ones that get stretched out and threadbare after a few months. i wish i had linen and wool shirt options instead of only paper thin cotton shirts

the statement that sheep would require all the land ever- the deal with livestock through human history is that not all land is created equal, and livestock is how you used the areas that were sub-par. the fertile land you farmed crops, but there is far far more land thats unsuited for vegetables but grows grass just fine, as we cant eat the grass we set out animals like cows and sheep that CAN eat the grass and let them go wild chewin their cud and poopin on the ground while the humans are busy ploughing and harvesting on the more valuable land; allowing the ungulates to convert that grass into usable products like wool, cheese, meat, leather. there’s reasons some areas are covered with sheep and cows EVEN TODAY- either its not usable as croplands or the population nearby is so low that you couldn’t effectively organize labor to exploit farming. new zealand and australia have absurd numbers of sheep for this reason- the land is either too sparse, hilly, or remote, but wool can be exported for profit just fine. however areas like iowa and california have very few sheep as the land is better suited for grain and seasonal vegetables and using it for grazing would be less effective

further the statement that wool and linen are more labor intensive then cotton- theres a reason the cotton industry historically relied on slavery when wool and linen were historically a cottage industry people did in their spare time while being a full time farmer. you let a sheep out on the lawn to do its own thing, it grows the wool, once a year you shave it and spin it into thread- it produces more sheep and tasty mutton as well. linnen is made from flax plants, which are harvested with a sickle and then left in some water to rot for a week, split open, and the fibers inside spun into thread- teams up well with beekeeping as flax produces huge fields of beautiful flowers. in both the hard work is done by animals and a pond, not human hands. cotton however required you to not only plant it but spend time to pick individual bolls off of the flowering buds after it went to seed in the summer sun one at a time instead of mowing with a scythe like flax in an afternoon, which then had to have someone pick all the seeds out of each boll individually before spinning, theres no side product and it depletes the soil like a sonovabitch

pictured- super easy, giving a sheep a haircut would be so much worse right? im sure the man on a horse with a whip and gun is there to make sure everyone is having a good time

and finally the primary dumb part of the highlighted segment- the assumption that if cotton didnt exist you would sleep on a pile of straw. what? is this talking today or talking medieval times again? flipping NEOLITHIC folks were bright enough to lay a blanket on top of their straw pile before they took a nap on it.  even back when straw beds were common you didnt lay on the straw, the straw was a filling for a leather or canvas bag so that you didnt get poked, and even then chances are pretty good you stuffed your bed with feathers because if theres something an agrarian society has more then enough of its poultry. if you are talking today i challenge you to go to a matress store and find a cotton filled bed- theyre filled with springs or foam, and for all points and purposes the foam is just a high tech version of straw that doesn’t rot. that, and any modern mattress is synthetic fiber to combat body odor and sweat absorption

this is not how beds work

these pre-cotton folk seem to be pretty comfortable, even if they hadnt invented perspective yet. as there is no crown im pretty sure they werent importing their fabrics from india or egypt

oh, look, pre-cotton comfortable underwear, soft sheets, and a bed that looks excessively comfortable with no straw or furs in sight

a world without cotton isnt a world without soap either jackass

I love everyone in this thread thank you. 

please someone shown me multi chromatic dies, are y'all insisting middle ages was a buncha tie died serfs?

Given that tie-dye was one among many resist dye methods popular in India and Indonesia in the middle ages, yes. Not in Europe, necessarily, but boy did tie-dye ever exist pre-1600. 

As far as Europe is concerned, they hadn’t figured out how to dye cotton and get anything even remotely similar in quality to the hundreds of colour-fast styles they’d later run into in India. But they also knew how to weave brocades. And stripes. And repeat patterns. And a lot of them liked obnoxious colour combinations.


(This one is a cheat b/c it’s a European image of a woman in Persian clothing, but I love her stripe combinations too much to leave her out.) 


And have some plaids, parti-colours, checks and stripes for good measure:


Also, if we hadn’t had cotton, at least in the US, we’d have a ton of HEMP fabric. Which, if you use the right variants, is just as soft and more durable. A large chunk of the reason we don’t have much hemp fiber production in the US is that cotton growers had enough political clout to quash it.

And yeah, who the fuck thinks COTTON is easier to dye than wool or silk?

Apparently, Sven Beckert, Professor of History at Harvard and author of “Empire of Cotton: A Global History”, from which this appears to be an excerpt. The book won the Bancroft Prize and shortlisted for the Pulitzer. It looks like it’s one of those books that does “Guns Germs and Steel” through the lens of the authors’ favorite animal/substance/pop song - I.E, “society exists in its current form because of X” - with the idea being that cotton caused the Industrial Revolution and the structure of modern capitalism. Which could be fun, apart from the highlighted paragraph being rather misleading about, well, cotton.

At first glance, it genuinely does appear a book on fibercraft made it all the way to the “prize-awarding” stage without the input of a single fibercrafter at any point in the process, which is quite astonishing, since fibercrafters are not exactly Quiet and Reserved. The immense amount of interconnected knowledge contained in a single woman knitting on the train is just boiling under the surface of her skin like a living thing, waiting to leap out and sink its teeth into someone’s throat. You don’t mess around with Fiber Fandom; the unexpectedly serious Discourse will cover everything from medieval economies to the proper husbandry of goats.  

I’d be rather tempted to quietly ask the author about this, and just see if it’s something he propagates throughout the book, or if it’s just a passage he popped in for hyperbole and attempted humor to set up his argument (perhaps there’s a gotcha on the next page where he says “LOL JUST KIDDING, I WAS JUST TRYING TO SET A SCENE”) and it didn’t come off quite right. Like, deliberately attempting to mislead in order to set up a one-two punch. 

I really would be interested in hearing more about the book, OP!

my judgement is reserved since this passage could potentially undermine an interesting work.

I did credit the book in a later reblog once it started accumulating notes. I had no idea it would go far and originally didn’t want to make this a callout, just a ‘Look at the Crap I Deal With While Dissertating,’ but naturally that’s not the version that spread. 

The book is Empire of Cotton – the photo is of page xiii of the introduction, for the curious – and there is no punchline. Some portions of the book, including the introduction, are available for perusal on google books.

I will cop to not having read the whole book - I wallbanged it (read: politely returned it to the library shelf while quietly muttering curse words) after the introduction - but the introduction itself moves on neatly from there to discuss how nascent European capitalism made the west the center of cotton manufacture and trade. 

The book is part of a new-ish movement in material culture studies and, I assume, economics (though that’s in no way my field), looking at the global networks that facilitated movement of goods and commodities; international and cross-period biographies of things. He’s discussing cotton as a catalyst commodity for western capitalist economies, and the brutality of the slave trade that went along with the quest for cotton profits. 

Given that he’s coming from economic history as a background, it’s in no way surprising to me that he doesn’t appear to have spoken to a single fibre artist in the process. In my experience there is a vast gulf in perceived status between “academic” and “applied” experts and that certainly seems to map in this case. 

(This is normally when I’d launch into a speech about the serious underlying misogyny inherent in the academy’s treatment of dress and textile studies, the exclusion of embodied knowledge as serious inquiry, and the way subjects like fashion theory are considered trivial unless specifically couched in, say, economic terms, but I don’t have the energy for it right now.) 

For those interested in cotton as a fibre and the time period in general, I’d recommend Beverly Lemire’s work instead.

That sounds like what I suspected - it read very much like an academic trying to do pop writing and Appeal To The Masses, not being aware that they were alienating a well-informed niche. It can go either way. And one doesn’t want to call out an academic irresponsibly, when they simply expressed themselves poorly.

I’m happy to reblog your explanation - I think it’s extremely fair and clear, and I hope that it will spread. It even looks like a book I’d leaf through myself. I think you did it justice.

But I am shaking my head in sympathy for the poor fellow. Of all the craft in all the world to get wrong.

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!