Comments broken?

by Yule Heibel on January 21, 2004

Comments aren’t showing up here, at least I can’t see them. Funky link?


Shelley January 21, 2004 at 12:23 pm

I noticed this yesterday. Something wrong with Radio?

Yule Heibel January 21, 2004 at 4:40 pm

Ah, excellent, comments are back. Doug and Shelley and Joel and Maria commented on “Got Daughters.” If you want, put your comment here or try again on “Got Daughters.” (I know they commented because this program has the nifty feature of sending me comments via email. So, even if you comment on something from months ago, I’ll be able to read your comment since it lands directly in my email inbox. I don’t know if it’s standard with all blog software, but it’s a very good feature.)

Anyway, back on track. Now it’s just me who has to get out of funkland and get moving!

Joel January 21, 2004 at 6:39 pm

Weird. It still does not let me post to Got Daughters.

Joel January 21, 2004 at 6:40 pm

My Got Daughters comment: I recently picked up a book about Ancient Greek athletries — female athletes — who competed in a separate games at the Olympics and elsewhere. Women could own horses and received credit for races run in the male games. They ran their own races, wearing loose-fitting robes that left one breast bare and probably didn’t have good coverage of the area around the hips.

There’s also the story of a woman who sneaked into the male-only games despite the death penalty for doing so. She revealed herself
when her son won. The spectators took it in good humor and the official judges decided to commute the sentence to a hearty laugh according to accounts.

Check out the link to the article about Bonnie L. Basler under The Klansman Gravity Problem on my blog. It’s strange to think of Scientific American as a magazine that sells women as bodies, but there you have it.

Yule Heibel January 22, 2004 at 1:38 am

thanks, Joel. Today I heard another interesting interview, this one with Waneek Horn-Miller, the Canadian Olympic water polo champion who posed for Time Magazine wearing nothing but a feather and holding a water polo ball (the feather because she’s Mohawk and an activist for her community. Her explanation for what she did in showing off her naked (?, it was Time Magazine, so I don’t think it was baring all) body was so compelling, but it came from a different position. She was owning her body, showing off its power. Her mother (and she agreed) told her it was imperative not to smile, not to make it into cheesecake with the appealing smile. She said she weighed 160 lbs in the photo, much of it muscle and pure strength. The difference? Pride, but not titillation. Self-ownership, not merchandising.

It’s a complex issue, but even though Laura Robinson has gotten a lot of flack for her book, I see her points very clearly, and I don’t think they’re at all incompatible with what Horn-Miller did, and Horn-Miller’s pose is completely different from the Nordic team’s nude calendar, too. Interesting issue, at any rate.

Yule Heibel January 22, 2004 at 1:40 am

My radio listening typically happens when I have doctors’ appointments to drive to. Haven’t been sick, but it seems everyone is due for checkups, and that means I actually get to listen to good stuff occasionally…

Joel January 22, 2004 at 2:54 am

I’m still trying to figure out what Bonnie Basler was trying to convey in that Scientific American shot.

As for smiles, I think we can make a distinction between what is provoked by commercialism and what is sincere.

What do you make of Degas “Olympia”?

Yule Heibel January 22, 2004 at 3:01 am

Manet’s Olympia is absolutely a touchstone. Some of the best stuff written about it is in T.J. Clark’s book, The Painting of Modern Life. But incidentally, I just referred to Olympia on Shelley’s blog.

Joel January 22, 2004 at 4:43 am

My head hangs with shame. It’s the hour. I like the piece Manet did the following year using the same model but wearing a dress that covered all of her body except for the face and hands.

Joel January 22, 2004 at 4:46 am

Incidentally, we have a book called Impressionist Cats, showing felines in various scenes made famous by the impressionists. “Olympia” is a beige Siamese accompanied, of course, by a black cat in full dress.

There’s something about the picture that makes me laugh but at the same time get at the real point of “Olympia”. Though my cats run around in the buff all the time, this cat looks distinctly naked.

Stu Savory January 22, 2004 at 7:40 am

Well I can read em here Yule at 13:41 CET on 22/1/4.
And the success of this attempt to write here too, we shall see.


Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: