Art

cross-posted from: https://literature.cafe/post/25018930

**What happens when love itself becomes a form of waste management? **

This is a portrait of the failure of distinction between what is wasted and what is “recyclable,” between love as pure gift and love as transaction.

Two armless mannequins kissing in a trashcan, this is not simply “trash art,” no, it is the purest materialization of the contemporary impasse of love under late capitalism.

Let’s begin with the obvious obscenity (yes ive been reading too much zizek): the kiss in the trashcan. It is not just that love here is “trash,” something thrown away — it is that love, when it is genuine, when it gives without expecting return, is structurally trash.

It cannot be recycled, cannot be reinserted into the symbolic economy of exchange. When you love, you lose an arm, because you give without measure. The armless mannequins embody this impossibility of holding, of possessing the Other. Their kiss, confined in a trashcan, is the remainder of a gesture that no longer belongs to the order of usefulness.

Like all true love, it is obscene in its uselessness.

But then — beside it — the recycling bin. With trash and mannequin legs. The legs are crucial — they are the organs of movement. They are what allows the subject to go somewhere AND to return, to complete an exchange. To “give your legs,” in this sense, is to give only a part of yourself and to expect it to 're-enter circulation'. To give you productive value.

The recycling bin is thus the perfect allegory for consumerist love, where love and consumerist products are one and the same, where even intimacy is a system of return: you give in order to receive, you recycle your emotions, hoping they will come back in a purified form just as we expect from our products.

So love has been contaminated by waste — desire itself has become polluted.

Here “authentic giving” and “productive exchange” have disintegratedd. Even our attempts to “recycle love,” to make it sustainable, are revealed as obscene. The leg, detached from the mannequin’s body, is no longer a symbol of movement but a fetishized fragment, a commodity of desire without wholeness.

Thus, the entire scene performs the commodification of the gift. The trashcan kiss — pure, useless love — sits beside its own mirror: a recycling bin that pretends to restore value but only produces dismembered remains.

So in late capitalism, even our trash is asked to be productive, to “come back” as something new. Yet love, real love, cannot be recycled. It must remain a remainder, a waste — the excess that escapes every system.

It is also crucial that they are mannequins because mannequins embody the paradox of the human under capitalism — they are perfect imitations of people, yet utterly empty, subjects reduced to pure form without interiority. Their presence exposes love and desire as already commodified gestures, rehearsed poses of intimacy with no flesh, no vulnerability. When these hollow consumer objects attempt to love — armless, plastic, discarded — the act becomes tragic: even the symbols of consumption try to transcend their function, to feel something real. But precisely because they are mannequins, their kiss is doomed to remain a simulation — a love scene without life, revealing how the machinery of consumer desire has replaced the human capacity to feel with the glossy shell of it.

To love is not to circulate but to cease circulation — to accept loss without return, to dwell in the trashcan. It is there, among the discarded mannequins, that the only authentic intimacy survives.

The passage I wrote myself. The image I randomly found as a comment on a meme. The image was never intended as art, but i found it striking.

This dramatic image is of the great Indian fruit bat (Pteropus giganteus) frontally displayed with one wing out-stretched. The body is shown in considerable detail, with the bat’s fur, eyes, curling claws, and wing veins naturalistically articulated. This work is closely related to another image of a bat painted by the well-known artist Bhawani Das, who was trained in Mughal miniature painting and commissioned by Sir Elijah Impey, Chief Justice of Bengal (1774–1782), and his wife, Lady Mary, to make extensive natural history studies at their estate in Calcutta. It was perhaps made by a follower of Bhawani Das who worked in a slightly more naturalistic mode.

The Three Crosses, one of Rembrandt's finest works in any medium, represents the culmination of his virtuosity as a printmaker. He drew on the copperplate entirely in drypoint which allowed him to fully exploit the velvety areas of burr raised by the drypoint tool as it cut into the copper. When Rembrandt created this impression, he deliberately left ink on the printing plate; it lightly veils the figures standing at the foot of the cross on the right; a thicker layer almost completely covers the bushes along the right edge. By creatively inking the copperplate, Rembrandt in a certain sense painted each impression. Each time he printed the copperplate he created a unique work. He further varied impressions by printing them on different supports; this impression is printed on vellum, which infuses the composition with a warm light. Vellum, less absorbent than paper, holds ink on the surface, softening lines and enhancing the richness of entire effect.

Painted by Marco d’Oggiono, a close associate of Leonardo da Vinci’s in Milan, this picture combines elements of portraiture and allegory. The richly dressed female wearing an inscrutable smile is crowned with ivy and holds a bowl of cherries. The meaning is enigmatic: it may allude to marriage (ivy symbolized marital fidelity) but also suggests a connection with sophisticated literary circles. D’Oggiono built a successful career, first by working in Leonardo’s style and making copies after his paintings, later breaking away and crafting his own artistic identity.

Fully revealed in 2005, the verso of this sheet is inscribed with a gray-brown ink ".T." that is quite reminiscent of the "Melzi-Leoni" markings on Leonardo’s drawings and manuscripts. The study for the head of the Virgin on the recto has sometimes been doubted by scholars 'ex silentio' as being by Leonardo, possibly because its magical beauty renders it suspicious (Walter Vitzthum in 1966 quoted a recent English critic’s opinion in his support, "the drawing makes one think of Walter Pater’s mind rather than of Leonardo’s hand"). However, even in Leonardo’s most densely pictorial drawings, a few traces of his left-handed parallel hatching often remain visible underneath all the layers of the worked up medium. As the detailed scientific analyses of 2002-2003 demonstrated, this drawing is done with a nearly seamless sfumato technique, and is extremely homogeneous in its dense use of red and black chalks, revealing extensive, unified left-handed strokes in the rubbed-in intermediate shadows; these lines are also partly evident with the plain, unassisted eye (laboratory examinations by Marjorie Shelley and Rachel Mustalish, Paper Conservators, The Metropolitan Museum of Art; microphotograph details published and discussed by Carmen C. Bambach in Metropolitan Museum of Art 2003, pp. 41-42, 46-47, figs. 35a-d).

The left-handed strokes in the intermediate shadows of modeling had almost gone unnoticed until 2002-2003, as this drawing is much too often discussed by scholars from photographs, rather than from analysis of the original; one early historian who discerned the faint evidence of the "tratto alla mancina" in the drawing was Theodore Rousseau, the curator who acquired the work for the Metropolitan Museum of Art (see press release, dated 8 June 1951, Archive of The Metropolitan Museum of Art). The structural, delicately curving lower right to upper left strokes of the silvery, soft black chalk are most evident to the unassisted eye in the area of the Virgin’s forehead, while the short, left-handed strokes in the under-drawing done in red chalk are best evident in microscopic enlargements. Since this left-handed hatching is extensive, the drawing of the Head of the Virgin must unquestionably be authentic, and must have also served a creative, exploratory purpose in Leonardo’s design process. Among the great believers in the attribution of the drawing to Leonardo himself was Jean Paul Richter (the eminent anthologist of Leonardo’s writings), who catalogued the work in 1910, while it was in the collection of Dr. Ludwig Mond in London; most authors who have published an opinion about the Metropolitan Head of the Virgin have accepted it as an original work by Leonardo. While an attribution to Leonardo was hesitantly maintained by Carlo Pedretti and Patricia Trutty Coohill in 1993, they thought the drawing problematic and "so thoroughly overworked that one cannot penetrate to its original character" (this is not correct according to the most recent condition reports of the drawing in laboratory conditions in November 2005); the same authors considered the drawing a "bozzetto" with strong hints of the style of Bernardino Luini and Bernardino Lanino. It must be emphasized that the areas of intervention by later hands on the drawing are minimal (as is clarified by ultraviolet and transmitted light), and that the issues of condition are also minor: tiny flecks of dark accretions in the corner of the left eye, a slight vertical, curved area of abrasion at the base of the nose, and some strengthening of the deepest shadows of the nostril and lips. The design of the hair (done in places with bold, incisive strokes of the hard pointy black chalk at upper left) reveals noticeable changes of design by the artist. Still faintly visible are a pattern of tight curls done with small curving strokes on the side of the face (curling tendrils of hair similarly obscure the face in some of the Leda head studies; RL 12515, 12517, Windsor), while at least two alternative ideas for the forms of the thick braids enveloped in the veil-headdress at the crown of the head are explored with free, expressive strokes in partly erased layers of drawing in black chalk and then reworked differently on top (the alternative designs are comparable to some of Leonardo’s late head studies; RL 12533, 12534, Windsor). Recent positive opinions of the drawing have been stated by Pietro C. Marani (1999-2000), Martin Clayton (1996-97, 2002-2003), and David Alan Brown (2003).

This study is closely connected to the final design of Leonardo’s oil painting on panel, the Virgin and Child with Saint Anne (Musée du Louvre, Paris), which the present author dates to ca. 1508–12 (in agreement with Pietro C. Marani, Leonardo: una carriera di pittore, Milan, 1999-2000, pp. 275-78). Although the delicately finished drawing surface of the Metropolitan Museum study has suffered somewhat from slight abrasions throughout, it is still possible to appreciate the atmospheric dissolution of the Virgin’s relief-like forms as a work of superb technical virtuosity. The artist reworked much of the drawing in soft black chalk with red chalk (this red chalk layer is especially evident in the face, but it is found in the hair as under-drawing), and used a sfumato technique to unify the layers of medium. The soft smudging of the strokes into seamlessly blended tone exactly recalls Leonardo’s famous note intended for the "Libro di Pittura," of 1490-92, in the Paris Manuscript A, fol. 107 verso (B.N. 2038, fol. 27 verso): "… che le tue o[m]bre e lumi sieno uniti sa[n]za tratti o segni, a uso di fumo." More importantly, the Metropolitan Museum study vividly illustrates the depths of Leonardo’s explorations of optical phenomena late in his career. Like a number of other drawings associated with the Louvre painting of the Virgin and Child with Saint Anne, this sheet is an important example of Leonardo’s innovative development of complex pictorial techniques of drawing, in order to materialize his scientific research on the perspective of color, the disappearance of form, and the gradations of light and shadow, as discussed in his notes of 1513-16 (see RL 19076 recto, Windsor; Paris Manuscript G, fol. 37 recto; Paris Manuscript E, fols. 15 recto-17 recto, 32 verso, 80 recto-verso). He advised artists that their drawings attempt to capture such minute types of observable phenomena, as the reflected varieties of brightness and darkness from surrounding objects onto primary forms (Paris Manuscript E, fol. 17 recto).

Of the other closely related preparatory drawings for the Louvre Virgin and Child with Saint Anne that exist, the Metropolitan Museum Head of the Virgin seems exactly comparable in date to the study in soft black chalk or charcoal for the head of St. Anne (RL 12533, Windsor), to the studies in red chalk on ochre prepared paper for the Christ Child (Gallerie dell’Accademia 257, Venice), and to some of the detail studies for the draperies (RL 12530, 12532, Windsor; Louvre 2257, Paris). See recent discussion in Carmen C. Bambach (ed.), Leonardo da Vinci: Master Draftsman. Exh. cat. New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 2003, pp. 557-70, nos. 105-109; Francoise Viatte and Varena Forcione (ed.) Léonard de Vinci: Dessins et manuscrits. Exh. cat. Paris, Musée du Louvre. Paris, 2003, pp. 243-65, no. 79-90 (with an early, unconvinving date of ca. 1499 for the Louvre drapery study inv. 2257). It is also clear from other drawings connected with the Louvre painting that Leonardo continued to executed studies for the picture into his French period, in 1516-19, and especially drapery studies (RL 12526, 12527, Windsor). See Martin Clayton, Leonardo da Vinci: A Singular Vision, exh. cat., Queen’s Gallery, Buckingham Palace, London, 1996-97, pp. 132-37. A number of landscape drawings are also connected to the composition of the Louvre painting, of which the study of rock formations (RL 12397, Windsor) seems especially close in date and drawing technique to the Metropolitan Head of the Virgin. It can be said that in his drawings for the Louvre Virgin and Child with St. Anne, Leonardo transformed scientific principles into a pictorial language of magical force and nuance.

The Metropolitan Head of the Virgin is among the earliest examples in Italy of the "two chalk technique," in which red and black chalks are blended for a subtly complementary pictorial effect. Among the Lombard followers of Leonardo who quickly adopted this innovative chalk technique was Bernardino Luini, whose large-scale studies of the infant heads for the painting of 1525-30, the Sleep of Jesus (Musée du Louvre, Paris) offer especially accomplished results. See Luini’s two drawings Louvre inv. 6815 and inv. 6816; discussed by Linda Wolk-Simon in Metropolitan Museum of Art 2003, pp. 667-69, nos. 132-33. Yet none of the head studies by such artists, however directly inspired by Leonardo they may be, approaches the poetry and beauty of drawing technique seen in the Metropolitan Head of the Virgin. Two early drawn copies after the Metropolitan Museum of Art drawing exist (Graphische Sammlung Albertina inv. 17613, Vienna; see Veronika Birke and Janine Kertész, Die italienischen Zeichnungen der Albertina: Generalverzeichnis,Vienna, Cologne, and Weimar, 1992-97, vol. 4, p. 2166, no. 7613; and Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F. 263 Inf. 67, Milan). An unconvincing attribution of the Ambrosiana copy to Cesare da Sesto was proposed by Luisa Cogliati Arano (see Augusto Marinoni and Luisa Cogliati Arano, Leonardo all'Ambrosiana: Il Codice Atlantico, i disegni di Leonardo e della sua cerchia, exh. cat., Biblioteca Ambrosiana, Milan, 1982, p. 128), as was also rightly observed by Marco Carminati (see Carminati, Cesare da Sesto, 1477-1523, Milan, 1994, p. 184, under no. 12).

Carmen C. Bambach.

Begun in Cape Cod over the summer and finished in New York City, it was the only oil painting Hopper produced that year. Reprising one of his signature subjects—a solitary figure, physically and emotionally detached from his surroundings and other people—it was described by the artist’s wife as "the man in concrete wall."

Kauffer spent the majority of his career working as a graphic designer in England, creating advertising posters that reflected his interest in Cubism, Italian Futurism, and Vorticism, a British art movement with affinities to Cubist abstraction and Futurism’s radical embrace of the machine. By the late 1920s Kauffer was also designing similarly inspired textiles and theatrical sets. Woven in wool and jute by the Wilton Royal Carpet Factory, this rug, with its collagelike combination of geometric shapes and planes of color, demonstrates Kauffer’s ongoing engagement with abstract design.

Was a contender for community banner.

This is one of three views of Gardanne, a hill town near Aix-en-Provence where Cézanne worked from the summer of 1885 through the spring of 1886. The steeple of the local church crowns the cluster of red-roofed buildings which animate the sloping terrain. Faceted and geometric, the structures anticipate early-twentieth-century Cubism.

Maybe my favourite Cezanne painting!

The famous writer and expatriate Gertrude Stein was among the first Americans to respond enthusiastically to European avant-garde art. She held weekly salons in her Paris apartment populated by European and American artists and writers. For Picasso, Stein’s early patronage and friendship was critical to his success. He painted this portrait of her between 1905 and 1906 at the end of his so-called "Rose Period." He reduces her body to simple masses—a foreshadowing of his adoption of Cubism—and portrays her face like a mask with heavy lidded eyes, reflecting his recent encounter with Iberian sculpture.

Trade cards from the "Terrors of America" series (N136), issued in a set of 50 cards in 1889 by W. Duke Sons & Co. to promote Honest Long Cut Tobacco. The original lithographs for the series were created by Knapp & Company, N.Y. This is the second time that Duke released the "Terrors of America" series. The cards of the first set (N88) are smaller than N136 cards.

Publisher Issued by W. Duke, Sons & Co. American Lithographer Lithography by Knapp & Company American 1888–89

The Futurists’ celebration of the fast pace and mechanical power of the modern world is emphasized here in the sculpture’s dynamism and energy. The figure’s marching silhouette appears deformed by wind and speed, while its sleek metal contours allude to machinery. World War I broke out the year after Boccioni created this work. Believing that modern technological warfare would shatter Italy’s obsession with the classical past, the Futurists welcomed the conflict. Tragically, Boccioni was killed in action in 1916, at the age of thirty-four.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55190818

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/54849462

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55344435

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/54960308

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55393935

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/54974798

Mehrgarh was the home to the earliest known cotton farmers in history.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55265572

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55192252

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55191082