Swans

[strawberry daiquiri]

Originally posted by KitKat@Sep 9 2004, 08:07 PM
elegance is a masculine trait?

[snapback]361061[/snapback]​

Came as a shock to me too. So much for each person being a person and not a gender.

 

[PrinceOfCats]

"Elegance is essentially a modern concept. It is not found in descriptions of Marie Antoinette or Queen Elizabeth I. In Jane Austen's novels it is a term more likely to be used to describe men than women. It is a state of mind, a physical manner of presentation that only really came into existence when women took on the silhouettes and shapes of male fashion, which aim at elongating and narrowing the body, rather than the traditional bulk of female fashion, which filled space and constrained movement"

 

[purplelucrezia]

Actually, the masculine physic has more bulk to it than the female (depending upon the individual, of course). That's why Michelangelo prefered the male body so much more than the female. He liked the weight to the male form, and even enhanced it to fit his ideals. If you look at his sculptures of women, you'll notice that they basically resemble men with breasts and without the genitals.
Similarly, if you look at the differences between male and female bodybuilders you'll see why they don't compete at the same level. Just as women have had such a difficult time getting into firefighting, another male-dominated proffession. The reality is that women are naturally of a lighter build than men, and clothing over the ages generally fits with that idea.
Of course, fashion is often about the distortion of human form, which is why we get corsets, bustles, etc. However, your perception of female fashion totally ignores entire segments of fashion history. The Greeks and Roman, the entire Empire period, the '20s... All focused on a more authentic female form.

Just look here, please. Joan of Arc, slightly muscular, but still a woman, wearing a man's armour. You can clearly pick out how the harder lines of the armour don't parallel her form.
http://maidjoan.tripod.com/swynnerton2.jpg

Anyway- I'm going majorly off topic!

 

[PrinceOfCats]

Originally posted by purplelucrezia@Sep 9 2004, 02:56 PM
Actually, the masculine physic has more bulk to it than the female (depending upon the individual, of course). That's why Michelangelo prefered the male body so much more than the female. He liked the weight to the male form, and even enhanced it to fit his ideals. If you look at his sculptures of women, you'll notice that they basically resemble men with breasts and without the genitals.
Similarly, if you look at the differences between male and female bodybuilders you'll see why they don't compete at the same level. Just as women have had such a difficult time getting into firefighting, another male-dominated proffession. The reality is that women are naturally of a lighter build than men, and clothing over the ages generally fits with that idea.
Of course, fashion is often about the distortion of human form, which is why we get corsets, bustles, etc. However, your perception of female fashion totally ignores entire segments of fashion history. The Greeks and Roman, the entire Empire period, the '20s... All focused on a more authentic female form.

Just look here, please. Joan of Arc, slightly muscular, but still a woman, wearing a man's armour. You can clearly pick out how the harder lines of the armour don't parallel her form.

[url="'http://maidjoan.tripod.com/swynnerton2.jpg'"]http://maidjoan.tripod.com/swynnerton2.jpg[/url]
Anyway- I'm going majorly off topic!

[snapback]361111[/snapback]​

Even with more bulk the male form is still more elegant. Breasts and bums simply aren't elegant.

And Greek and Roman fashions aren't really relevant to modern European culture...

 

[purplelucrezia]

Originally posted by PrinceOfCats@Sep 9 2004, 03:02 PM
Even with more bulk the male form is still more elegant. Breasts and bums simply aren't elegant.

And Greek and Roman fashions aren't really relevant to modern European culture...

[snapback]361118[/snapback]​

Alright then.

http://www.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/humftp/Fine_Ar...sNapoleon.1.jpg
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/Wave/image/joco..._84ee1225_p.jpg

http://www.hermitagemuseum.org/imgs_En/05/hm5_1_13_2_big.jpg

By the way, this painting is actually relevant to the topic! The sitter's name is Madame Riviere, she is set in front of a river and all of the imagery is intended to reflect that of a swam...

 

[strawberry daiquiri]

Killing a swan in Ireland was punishable by death - for they were believed to be Otherworld women in the shape of birds.

In Celtic myth, swan deities are solar and beneficent, associated with the therapeutic power of the sun, thermal springs and the chariot of the sun.

They meant everything year after year, and so were rightfully immortalised both then and now.

 

[Spacemiu]

Originally posted by strawberry daiquiri@Sep 9 2004, 01:32 PM
Killing a swan in Ireland was punishable by death - for they were believed to be Otherworld women in the shape of birds.

In Celtic myth, swan deities are solar and beneficent, associated with the therapeutic power of the sun, thermal springs and the chariot of the sun.

They meant everything year after year, and so were rightfully immortalised both then and now.

[snapback]361156[/snapback]​

wow. that's beautiful

 

[KitKat]

I'm learning so much on this board! I don't want to get too off topic, but I still don't understand why breasts and bum aren't elegant. I see what you're trying to say, Prince, but I can't agree.. Physical imperfections, as in too much fat, bad posture, etc. (even though it all depends) - all that I could see isn't what elegance is about, but breasts and bum aren't physical imperfections, why should they be considered as such? A woman *without* breasts would be considered imperfect, and besides, a female body can be streamlined too. It's more about health and proportions, not just about something sticking out - isn't it? The idea I'm getting here is that women can't be elegant, simply because they are women? And the only way they can be elegant is by denying nature and trying to be physically more like men (which in a way is/has already happened), or even better young boys? So men are physical perfection, women imperfection?Wow, writing this, one idea is following the next. This would explain a lot...


Swans.... Beautiful from far away, otherwise I'm more scared of them, lol. Irrational, loud, moody and sometimes very aggressive.

 

[PrinceOfCats]

Originally posted by KitKat@Sep 10 2004, 04:55 PM
I'm learning so much on this board! I don't want to get too off topic, but I still don't understand why breasts and bum aren't elegant. I see what you're trying to say, Prince, but I can't agree.. Physical imperfections, as in too much fat, bad posture, etc. (even though it all depends) - all that I could see isn't what elegance is about, but breasts and bum aren't physical imperfections, why should they be considered as such? A woman *without* breasts would be considered imperfect, and besides, a female body can be streamlined too. It's more about health and proportions, not just about something sticking out - isn't it? The idea I'm getting here is that women can't be elegant, simply because they are women? And the only way they can be elegant is by denying nature and trying to be physically more like men (which in a way is/has already happened), or even better young boys? So men are physical perfection, women imperfection?Wow, writing this, one idea is following the next. This would explain a lot...
Swans.... Beautiful from far away, otherwise I'm more scared of them, lol. Irrational, loud, moody and sometimes very aggressive.

[snapback]362522[/snapback]​

I stick to my guns that women are not naturally elegant and that they become elegant by taking on masculine traits (look at models - do many of them have breasts or bums to speak of?). I do not consider curves 'imperfections' I simply think that they aren't elegant in the same way that the angular lines of the male form are not voluptous. Therefore, to me, the swan is a very masculine bird.

And I totally agree about the swans temperament - did you know that a swan can break your arm or leg with one wing-beat

I'm not sure if the 'essence' of the swan is enough to work on be it masculine or feminine...it would take a very talented designer to make anything cerebral out of it...

 

[KitKat]

Originally posted by PrinceOfCats@Sep 11 2004, 12:04 AM

And I totally agree about the swans temperament - did you know that a swan can break your arm or leg with one wing-beat


I'm not sure if the 'essence' of the swan is enough to work on be it masculine or feminine...it would take a very talented designer to make anything cerebral out of it...

[snapback]362536[/snapback]​

Wow, no rose without a thorn, no swan without a wing-beat... Agreed on the essence, but the rest I didn't quote, I'll just leave right now...lol.

 

[purplelucrezia]

Originally posted by PrinceOfCats@Sep 10 2004, 05:04 PM
I stick to my guns that women are not naturally elegant and that they become elegant by taking on masculine traits (look at models - do many of them have breasts or bums to speak of?)

I can only wonder what your girlfriend thinks about this outlook.

 

[strawberry daiquiri]

Originally posted by purplelucrezia@Sep 10 2004, 11:57 PM
I can only wonder what your girlfriend thinks about this outlook.

[snapback]362618[/snapback]​

I can only hope she doesn't know.

 

[PrinceOfCats]

Originally posted by purplelucrezia@Sep 10 2004, 05:57 PM
I can only wonder what your girlfriend thinks about this outlook.

[snapback]362618[/snapback]​

She's not interested in fashion or appearance enough to be bothered I wouldn't imagine.

 

[strawberry daiquiri]

You quoted yourself that it was 'a state of mind, a physical manner of presentation'.

Fashion and appearances aren't the conclusions this slant would lead me to jump to.

 

[purplelucrezia]

Originally posted by PrinceOfCats@Sep 10 2004, 06:01 PM
She's not interested in fashion or appearance enough to be bothered I wouldn't imagine.

[snapback]362623[/snapback]​

And no woman cares that her partner doesn't find her beautiful.

Getting off topic, but I remember that in the Agony and the Escatacy, Michelangelo thought the same thing about females.

 

[PrinceOfCats]

Originally posted by strawberry daiquiri@Sep 10 2004, 06:05 PM
You quoted yourself that it was 'a state of mind, a physical manner of presentation'.

Fashion and appearances aren't the conclusions this slant would lead me to jump to.

[snapback]362632[/snapback]​

Presentation being the key operator. And the quote being from a book of fashion. I assure you that my girlfriend has absolutely no interest in the male or female physique as regards elegance...

 

[PrinceOfCats]

Originally posted by purplelucrezia@Sep 10 2004, 06:06 PM
And no woman cares that her partner doesn't find her beautiful.

Getting off topic, but I remember that in the Agony and the Escatacy, Michelangelo thought the same thing about females.

[snapback]362633[/snapback]​

Beauty and elegance are two very different things...

 

[strawberry daiquiri]

Elegance: 'Refinement, grace, and beauty in movement, appearance, or manners.'

Movement, manners... behaviour, and how someone uses their body, whatever its proportions. As common to one gender as to the other. Noone’s yet said elegance was a female quality, it's just that you had to say it was male didn't you.

We now have elegance added to our list of, to be seen only in the eye of the beholder.

 

[PrinceOfCats]

Originally posted by strawberry daiquiri@Sep 10 2004, 06:21 PM
Elegance: 'Refinement, grace, and beauty in movement, appearance, or manners.'

Movement, manners... behaviour, and how someone uses their body, whatever its proportions. As common to one gender as to the other. Noone’s yet said elegance was a female quality, it's just that you had to say it was male didn't you.

We now have elegance added to our list of, to be seen only in the eye of the beholder.

[snapback]362647[/snapback]​

For something this specialised a dictionary defintion is not appropriate or useful. I did not 'have' to say that elegance was a male trait and if you had followed the thread properly you would know why I said it. I now have another for my list your of unfounded accusations of me...

 

[strawberry daiquiri]

Originally posted by PrinceOfCats@Sep 11 2004, 12:26 AM
...and if you had followed the thread properly you would know why I said it. I now have another for my list your of unfounded accusations of me...

[snapback]362652[/snapback]​

I read every post, so I must have got lost along the way.

In future I'll ask for your permission before I refer to that OED.