Stranger things

[BigSkyDiamond]

26 minutes ago, Cobie said:

It was ladies fashion in those days

 

And speaking of fashion, it was the changing fashion of the times, and the updates made to the painting by artist Renoir, that helped accurately date the painting.  He began the painting in about 1880 in the Impressionist style. Then about 1885 he changed the painting "after losing his attachment to Impressionism and drawing inspiration from classical art he had seen in Italy, and the works of Cezanne and Ingres."

 

"[He] reworked parts of the painting, particularly the principal female figure to the left of the frame, in a more classical linear style using more muted colours, and added the background and the umbrellas themselves. X-ray photography has shown that the clothing of the female figure was originally different: she wore a hat and her dress had horizontal rows of frills, with white lace at its cuffs and collar, suggesting that she was middle class, whereas the simpler clothes in the revised painting mark her out as a member of the working class, a grisette not a bourgeoise.  The x-ray analysis and then the changing fashions allow the periods of work to be dated with reasonable accuracy."

 

from Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Umbrellas_(Renoir)

 

Edited August 2 by BigSkyDiamond

[Taomeow]

The version I heard was that

 

1) he was in a great hurry to rework the painting for an exhibition and cut a few corners (the mystery leg being one of them) and

2) he was very fashion aware and knew full well that the bustles were, at the time he finished the painting (1886), a faux pa in Paris.  It's a bit like low cut skinny jeans in 2025 -- anyone with a sense of style would avoid that.  So that thing may be a bustle painted with disdain -- if that's what it is.   

 

And even if that leg belongs to the lady with a purported bustle, I can't quite imagine, anatomically, how and where it would attach to her body.  

 

Renoir's Girl with a Fan is a painting I grew up with -- my parents hung it in my bedroom because they thought I looked like her at the time -- so I do have warm feelings for Renoir.  But this particular work is a train wreck if you ask me.   

[BigSkyDiamond]

38 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

The version I heard was that

 

1) he was in a great hurry to rework the painting for an exhibition and cut a few corners (the mystery leg being one of them) and

2) he was very fashion aware and knew full well that the bustles were, at the time he finished the painting (1886), a faux pa in Paris.  It's a bit like low cut skinny jeans in 2025 -- anyone with a sense of style would avoid that.  So that thing may be a bustle painted with disdain -- if that's what it is.   

 

And even if that leg belongs to the lady with a purported bustle, I can't quite imagine, anatomically, how and where it would attach to her body.  ...  But this particular work is a train wreck if you ask me.   

 

This article discusses at length and in depth the various stages and different time periods in the making of the painting  The Umbrellas by Renoir.  It also includes illustrations and x-rays that show portions of the "earlier" details that were changed (i.e. hat removed, painted over).  It is fascinating.

 

National Gallery Technical Bulletin

 

And yes although the painting was completed so he could show it at the 1886 New York exhibition, it was the "left" side of the painting that was changed at that time and updated to the linear style, not the "right" side of the painting which was done earlier and allowed to remain in the Impressionist style.

 

"Umbrellas painted during this period of artistic re-evaluation, but it was produced in two stages with a gap of around four years between the first stage [1881] and the second [1885].  Having put the picture aside, Renoir was prompted to complete it when it was to be included in a major exhibition of Impressionist painting due to open in New York in April 1886.

 

"The Umbrellas is a painting of two distinct styles. During the first stage he worked on it, Renoir painted the group on the right that includes a mother and her two daughters and the woman in profile in the centre who looks up as she opens her umbrella. These people, who are presented side-on, are painted in a characteristically Impressionist manner. Renoir uses delicate feathery touches ...Their soft facial features are not clearly modelled and Renoir avoids crisp contours or outlines.

 

"The people on the left of the painting, including the full-length young woman – a milliner’s assistant holding a bandbox – and the man standing behind her were originally painted using the feathery technique. At this first stage, the milliner’s assistant was also wearing a hat. Renoir then repainted the group during the second stage of the picture’s evolution, abandoning the soft technique for a more linear style. These figures now have clearly defined outlines and precisely drawn features."

 

from a different National Gallery article (click tab In Depth)

https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/pierre-auguste-renoir-the-umbrellas

 

Edited August 2 by BigSkyDiamond

[BigSkyDiamond]

1 hour ago, Taomeow said:

he was very fashion aware and knew full well that the bustles were, at the time he finished the painting (1886), a faux pa in Paris.  It's a bit like low cut skinny jeans in 2025 -- anyone with a sense of style would avoid that.  So that thing may be a bustle painted with disdain -- if that's what it is.   

 

And even if that leg belongs to the lady with a purported bustle, I can't quite imagine, anatomically, how and where it would attach to her body.  

 

 

Bustles were in style in Paris during two periods: 1870-1876 and 1883-1890.  So bustles were in vogue in 1886.  And the bustles during that time were larger and more prominent.  In the Renoir painting, she is leaning forward, and the little girl is shorter than her waist, so that is how the bustle appears, complete with ruffles.

 

"Unlike that used in the 1870s, the bustle of the 1880’s produced a prominence almost at right angles so that it was popularly declared a tea-tray could be comfortably rested on it.”

 

images from here,  The Bustle in the Mid-1880s

https://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-bustle-in-mid-1880s.html

 

and here shows London and Paris Ladies' Magazine August 1885

https://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2018/08/fashions-for-august-1885.html

 

 

 

Edited August 2 by BigSkyDiamond

[Taomeow]

@BigSkyDiamond

 

56 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

The version I heard was that (...)

 

 

I will let the author of this version* know that you heard a different version.

 

*Boris Akunin, a historian, Japanologist, and highly entertaining historical fiction writer (ranked No.1 most popular contemporary author in Russia) residing in London and frequenting the National Gallery where The Umbrellas are on display. 

[Cobie]

1 hour ago, Taomeow said:

… the mystery leg …

 

16 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

… a different version …

sometimes you just have to read the info provided, and gracefully acknowledge you got it wrong

 

 

Edited August 2 by Cobie

[BigSkyDiamond]

25 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

I will let the author of this version* know that you heard a different version.

 

no, not "heard"

rather, documented.

you heard.  i documented.

 

however certainly all art is open to interpretation.  by anyone.  including oh let's say a Russion who writes entertaining fiction and adopts the pen name from the Japanese kanji for "evil person" or "villain."   In one of his own fiction novels he redefines "akunin" as 'a great evil man who creates his own rules.' 

 

Edited August 2 by BigSkyDiamond

[Cobie]

2 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

no, not "heard"

rather, documented.

you heard.  i documented.

 

Yes

 

Quote

however certainly all art is open to interpretation. by anyone. …

 

this imo is not a case of “interpretation”. It’s just misrepresenting or not knowing the facts. 

 

Quote

… including those who write entertaining fiction.

Yes. Being very popular is not prove of veracity. And being a Japanologist does not qualify you to comment on any of this.

 

 

Edited August 2 by Cobie

[Taomeow]

Sense of humor is strong with these ones. -- Yoda (my opinion that he could have said it.  Not documented.  Opinion.)  

[BigSkyDiamond]

The successful Russian fiction novelist is Grigori Chkhartishvili.  His assorted pen names include:  Boris Akunin, Anatoly Brusnikin, Anna Borisova, and Akunin-Chkhartishvili. 

 

Edited August 2 by BigSkyDiamond

[Cobie]

18 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

The successful Russian fiction novelist is Grigori Chkhartishvili.  His assorted pen names include:  Boris Akunin, Anatoly Brusnikin, Anna Borisova, and Akunin-Chkhartishvili. 

my highlight

 

Lol, he’s good at fiction.

 

20 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

Sense of humor is strong with these ones. …

lol, we have arrived at the ad hominem; the last resort of those incapable of admitting they just got it wrong.

 

 

Edited August 2 by Cobie

[BigSkyDiamond]

3 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

Sense of humor is strong with these ones. -- Yoda (my opinion that he could have said it.  Not documented.  Opinion.)  

 

Sense of humor indeed!  I actually laughed out loud at the verbiage in previous posts which includes:  "purported bustle"  "may be a bustle"  "if that leg belongs to."

 

and to also quote another previous post, yes, "highly entertaining"

[Taomeow]

35 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

The successful Russian fiction novelist is Grigori Chkhartishvili.  His assorted pen names include:  Boris Akunin, Anatoly Brusnikin, Anna Borisova, and Akunin-Chkhartishvili. 

 

 

Thank you.  I've read nearly all of his books (though some of them listened to in audio format) but I appreciate your multiple efforts at educating me.   and @Cobie your effort to improve my morale too.  

 

Now would you two kindly take your pointless argumentative tone somewhere where boredom and forum fatigue desperately need a boost of fresh effort?  This thread was limping along just fine without them...  Please help it survive by moving on to a next one.   

[Nungali]

2 hours ago, Taomeow said:

Sense of humor is strong with these ones. -- Yoda (my opinion that he could have said it.  Not documented.  Opinion.)  

 

Off to the toilet cubicle with you ! 

 

( for a good cry ) 

 

The obvious answer is ........   Lois made that 'painting'  with his outdated AI painter program . 

[Nungali]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

my highlight

 

Lol, he’s good at fiction.

 

lol, we have arrived at the ad hominem; the last resort of those incapable of admitting they just got it wrong.

 

 

 

Hey !   That last line , you made an ad hominem   ! 

 

 

Oh  .....  this  was one too   .  

[Nungali]

2 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

Thank you.  I've read nearly all of his books (though some of them listened to in audio format) but I appreciate your multiple efforts at educating me.   and @Cobie your effort to improve my morale too.  

 

Now would you two kindly take your pointless argumentative tone somewhere where boredom and forum fatigue desperately need a boost of fresh effort?  This thread was limping along just fine without them...  Please help it survive by moving on to a next one.   

 

 

Now 'the gang' is after you    .   

 

Gives me a break for a change .    

 

 My favourite bit was when   you     were 'admonished'  for  ;  "  I actually laughed out loud at the verbiage in previous posts which includes:  "purported bustle" ..... "

 

after he posted  :  

 

3 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

 

Bustles were in style in Paris during two periods: 1870-1876 and 1883-1890.  So bustles were in vogue in 1886.  And the bustles during that time were larger and more prominent.  In the Renoir painting, she is leaning forward, and the little girl is shorter than her waist, so that is how the bustle appears, complete with ruffles.

 

"Unlike that used in the 1870s, the bustle of the 1880’s produced a prominence almost at right angles so that it was popularly declared a tea-tray could be comfortably rested on it.”

 

images from here,  The Bustle in the Mid-1880s

https://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-bustle-in-mid-1880s.html

 

and here shows London and Paris Ladies' Magazine August 1885

https://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2018/08/fashions-for-august-1885.html

 

 

 

 

 

So that is what a bustle is   ......   I never knew !    Now we are fully verbiaged    . 

 

   

Edited August 2 by Nungali

[Taomeow]

55 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Off to the toilet cubicle with you ! 

 

( for a good cry ) 

 

Nothing like good company for a good cry 😿 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 3 by Taomeow

[liminal_luke]

 

Edited August 3 by liminal_luke

[Nungali]

Dont be sad  Luke  ......   eat and be happy  ;

 

 

 

[Taomeow]

Back to stranger things.

A sleeping octopus changes colors as she dreams.  And at 0:16 also grows spikes on her nose.

 

https://x.com/wonderofscience/status/1952034474398490989

 

Edited August 4 by Taomeow

[Sanity Check]