?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

uh...


So, I was noodling about on the Google, and what do I find?

a picture of me.  Supposedly, in 'bethan clothing.  Is it one of the ones where I'm actually properly dressed?  Noooooooo.  It's one of me at an SCA event, looking like crap, because I'm selling stuff, or just dressed down.

(EDIT:  It's me in the Vair and Ermine common tent at Pennsic.  It was hot, okay?)

And no link to my site.  [expletive deleted].

Anyone have any ideas who put this up there?

(second edit): Meep! Christie's sold the panel my current jacket is based on!

Tags:

Comments

( 40 brains — Leave a chunk of brain! )
melaniesuzanne
Sep. 17th, 2010 03:35 pm (UTC)
The author lists Corby's flickr account in the photo credits. I'm guessing it was swiped from there.
heatermcca
Sep. 17th, 2010 03:49 pm (UTC)
I'm just seeing it credited to "an iconoclast." Perhaps I've missed something?
(no subject) - melaniesuzanne - Sep. 17th, 2010 03:51 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - heatermcca - Sep. 17th, 2010 03:56 pm (UTC) - Expand
thealater
Sep. 17th, 2010 03:35 pm (UTC)
I don't know, but I'd contact the original poster. (Did you notice the Victorian corset she used for an illustration?) There are no attributions of sources. Poor form.
tsuruko_sensei
Sep. 17th, 2010 03:41 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that. Using a Victorian corset to discuss Elizabethan costume. LAME!
(no subject) - degracieuse - Sep. 17th, 2010 04:34 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - alba_ny - Sep. 17th, 2010 05:42 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
cute_evil_bunny
Sep. 17th, 2010 03:44 pm (UTC)
Maybe write a more appropriate piece and include a letter or expliantion of what was wrong and submit both to the web site and maybe they will change it.
heatermcca
Sep. 17th, 2010 03:48 pm (UTC)
Since the pic is credited to "an iconoclast," I'm sort of betting that the person knew you'd be miffed. [ETA: It appears I'm in error on this note. Yay! I like it when the world proves to have fewer asses than I think there are. -H/M]

SAY, WHAT A NICE, TOTALLY NOT ELIZABETHAN AT ALL CORSET.

Edited at 2010-09-17 03:57 pm (UTC)
strawberrykaren
Sep. 17th, 2010 04:07 pm (UTC)
Regarding the second-edit meepage: The Art Institute of Chicago has two more of the panels out of that set, with that design. There's a good photo of one of their panels in Textiles in the Art Institute of Chicago. There's also a photo at http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/84737
attack_laurel
Sep. 17th, 2010 05:30 pm (UTC)
I was thinking more of the "there but for the lack of $30,000..."
(no subject) - _medb_ - Sep. 17th, 2010 06:53 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - strawberrykaren - Sep. 17th, 2010 07:12 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - _medb_ - Sep. 17th, 2010 08:48 pm (UTC) - Expand
reasie
Sep. 17th, 2010 04:15 pm (UTC)
Dude, they also show an obviously Victorian corset (with decorative lace?) as the image next to 'pieces of Elizabethan clothing'.

Did Elizabethans have stomachers of some sort? because I don't recall ever coming across that assertion before.

theives! They just liked your red hair, I bet.
ladysybylgrey
Sep. 17th, 2010 05:05 pm (UTC)
actually, they did have stomachers, both in the early Tudor-Elizabethan change over (see the picture of the young Elizabeth in the red/pink dress, get a good large image and you can see that the front panel is pinned at the side) when they were smooth to cover front-laced bodices; and in the late century, you can see decorative stomach panels that have been side pinned on dresses featuring French (wagon-wheel) farthingales.
(no subject) - attack_laurel - Sep. 17th, 2010 05:33 pm (UTC) - Expand
taamar
Sep. 17th, 2010 04:25 pm (UTC)
"Upper-class women wore velvet, silk and satin. Peasant women wore clothing made out of wool, English cotton, and linen."

Right, from the vast cotton plantations of Devon.
ladysybylgrey
Sep. 17th, 2010 05:06 pm (UTC)
lol.
(no subject) - ladysybylgrey - Sep. 17th, 2010 05:07 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - attack_laurel - Sep. 17th, 2010 05:29 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - weavedancer - Sep. 17th, 2010 08:23 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virginiadear - Sep. 17th, 2010 10:16 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - taamar - Sep. 18th, 2010 04:56 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virginiadear - Sep. 19th, 2010 12:36 am (UTC) - Expand
nq3x
Sep. 17th, 2010 04:41 pm (UTC)
Naomi Vogel is listed as the author.
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - taamar - Sep. 18th, 2010 05:00 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
hsifeng
Sep. 17th, 2010 05:27 pm (UTC)
The irony of all this, it is not lost on me.
(Deleted comment)
florentinescot
Sep. 17th, 2010 06:27 pm (UTC)
How do you flag it?
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - florentinescot - Sep. 17th, 2010 06:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
eac
Sep. 17th, 2010 06:44 pm (UTC)
You know I saw that recently. Was confused about why you were there, in a not-very-good article. Not that I thought to bring it up to you...
damedini
Sep. 18th, 2010 12:07 am (UTC)
I'm amused. Peasants wore cotton? English cotton, no less.
sircorby
Sep. 18th, 2010 09:28 pm (UTC)
I think....
I think maybe I took that pic of you.

Who else could get that look of dubious amusement?

Might be off my Flickr. I release all my pics CC sharealike non-commercial, attribution. So Naomi Vogel has only kinda sorta violated the rights.
(Anonymous)
Oct. 1st, 2010 02:38 pm (UTC)
And another thing...
Isn't the corset this person shows a Victorian or so corset style?? (Oh geez...really there is so much people should know before they write the articles.) BTW, I like your costumes, and knew your outfit wasn't for Elizabethan when I shared your pics and link on MY blog. Cheers! - Kat/Magaidh
( 40 brains — Leave a chunk of brain! )

Latest Month

April 2017
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com