Looks like Dorothy's house wasn't the only thing that blew away in the tornado
Although it was a normal event for that time in a girl's life, June was still very concern about her daughter's ovulation patterns.
Magruder County Public Schools were usually very supportive of student free expression and was reluctant to pass dress codes. But the school board drew the line with the "Crotch Area Bird's Nest" craze that was sweeping the county.
Quick Hildebrand, put on Uncle Bilbo's ring before the mother crow comes back
sigh . . . too obvious, WAY too obvious. It's like writing a symbolic poem, then doubling its length with footnotes (think Rime of the Ancient Mariner, much better before its author became afraid we wouldn't "get it"). Why the heck make the symbols if their only point is to say, "Look at us! We're symbols! Gee, don't we symbolize symbolically and stuff?!?"
Of course, if we really want to take it out a ways, it's Marian symbolism--the cute little-girl dress in white, perhaps an Easter dress, perched in a tree, thorniness in the nest and branches, the three eggs giving us a trinity . . . as if the trinity were in the womb, or something. Nah. Surely no one tried for *Trinitarian* symbolism this clumsily . . .
And what's with the ghostliness, here? Good grief, are we redacting the subject completely? Eh, there are knee-bend-draperies in the dress, so there's some faint sense of presence. The effect is that the evaporated body is reduced to these symbolic eggs, that if we are to believe these are religious symbols (the empty-but-not-empty dress makes us doubt that's the whole picture) the effect is a fusion of anti-feminism and Manichean hostility to the body . . . truly weird tripe.
Hmmh. Looking at this picture makes me want to take some of those anti-anxiety Zanax pills, which spammers keep advertising in Joe's comment boxes.
Josh writes:
Reading pgepps commentary makes me want some acetaminophen.
AndyS writes:
Oengus, don't encourage them!
AndyS writes:
Joe, you've got some stray HTML floating around:
<base
href="http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/">
appears under the preview button.
BTW, nice move forcing the preview.
Harris writes:
It would seem that the dress is the "ghost" -- note how the shoulders are in the same plane. This seems opposed to the curve of the thorns/nest.
I would echo the concern that this is too overt. The dress itself seems more detailed than the thorns/nest, and then also ofa particular, somewhat odd vintage. The question is raised, 'whose dress?' There is a missing specificity here, and so a lack of dimension.
The lack of specificity I think, invites the viewer to read it as a generic woman (albeit of a conservative sort): thus the nest becomes a visual pun for pubic region. Although the first read is of Mary (cf. Donne "Immensity cloistered in thy dear womb...") the visuals seem closer to a reference to Eve, to an every-womanness of bearing the Savior, and so to us of carrying God in our midst. Finally McComas moves from woman to Church.
In this latter mode, the very flatness of the dress becomes a type of veil, not unlike say the screen before the altar.
Caption time!
Looks like Dorothy's house wasn't the only thing that blew away in the tornado
Although it was a normal event for that time in a girl's life, June was still very concern about her daughter's ovulation patterns.
Magruder County Public Schools were usually very supportive of student free expression and was reluctant to pass dress codes. But the school board drew the line with the "Crotch Area Bird's Nest" craze that was sweeping the county.
Quick Hildebrand, put on Uncle Bilbo's ring before the mother crow comes back
"Expiration Date".
Veiled -
I don't get it.
sigh . . . too obvious, WAY too obvious. It's like writing a symbolic poem, then doubling its length with footnotes (think Rime of the Ancient Mariner, much better before its author became afraid we wouldn't "get it"). Why the heck make the symbols if their only point is to say, "Look at us! We're symbols! Gee, don't we symbolize symbolically and stuff?!?"
Of course, if we really want to take it out a ways, it's Marian symbolism--the cute little-girl dress in white, perhaps an Easter dress, perched in a tree, thorniness in the nest and branches, the three eggs giving us a trinity . . . as if the trinity were in the womb, or something. Nah. Surely no one tried for *Trinitarian* symbolism this clumsily . . .
And what's with the ghostliness, here? Good grief, are we redacting the subject completely? Eh, there are knee-bend-draperies in the dress, so there's some faint sense of presence. The effect is that the evaporated body is reduced to these symbolic eggs, that if we are to believe these are religious symbols (the empty-but-not-empty dress makes us doubt that's the whole picture) the effect is a fusion of anti-feminism and Manichean hostility to the body . . . truly weird tripe.
Cheers,
PGE
Hmmh. Looking at this picture makes me want to take some of those anti-anxiety Zanax pills, which spammers keep advertising in Joe's comment boxes.
Reading pgepps commentary makes me want some acetaminophen.
Oengus, don't encourage them!
Joe, you've got some stray HTML floating around:
<base
appears under the preview button.
BTW, nice move forcing the preview.
It would seem that the dress is the "ghost" -- note how the shoulders are in the same plane. This seems opposed to the curve of the thorns/nest.
I would echo the concern that this is too overt. The dress itself seems more detailed than the thorns/nest, and then also ofa particular, somewhat odd vintage. The question is raised, 'whose dress?' There is a missing specificity here, and so a lack of dimension.
The lack of specificity I think, invites the viewer to read it as a generic woman (albeit of a conservative sort): thus the nest becomes a visual pun for pubic region. Although the first read is of Mary (cf. Donne "Immensity cloistered in thy dear womb...") the visuals seem closer to a reference to Eve, to an every-womanness of bearing the Savior, and so to us of carrying God in our midst. Finally McComas moves from woman to Church.
In this latter mode, the very flatness of the dress becomes a type of veil, not unlike say the screen before the altar.