Bockstensmanen, a medieval person who happened to die in a bog which preserved his clothes (and more), clothes like hella comfy??
Like seriously. Comfy and warm wool clothes!
(yes this are pictures of his actual outfit, not reconstructed clothing. They were very well preserved in all except colour. The bog gave everything that yellow shade, i suspect)
It goes around the entire body! So perhaps not quite a mantel but.
A got a little hood with a fashionedble long thingy at the end
Warm that too! There is no openings for wind or anything, so like. Just pull hood over head, get warm!
Warm socks! Gotta keep em feets warm (and just like in english, the swedish words for trousers, byxor, is in plural in its normal form, just because the medieval version of trousers consisted of two separate peices like here.
Somewhere, there should be something for hos upper legs but idk were that one is)
Anyway! I do think one can tell that keeping warm was an important part of the logic behind bockstensmannens clothing. Not odd that, when he lived in Scandinavia and all…
When we already at it, with listning his entire outfit. Here his this shoes
Reconstruction in how he might have looked like in life. The musuem points out, that his skull was very smashed when found, werehas it might be a bit so so with this dolls facial similiarity with bockstensmannen in life. And his hair colour we know not, the bog will colour most hair red with enough time.
But that hairstyle! That he really had! Bockstensmannen wore like Peak Fluffy Medieval Hair Fashion in life
The entire doll wearing bockstensmannens reconstructed clothing
Thing in shows which makes me sick to my stomach every time, guaranteed: Random, unnamed characters screaming that they don’t want to die right before they get brutally slaughtered. It’s really nightmarish that that’s the only thing we ever know about them!
discoursedrome said: I find this upsetting but,
introspecting, it’s because it’s foregrounding the fact that murder is
nonconsensual? which is kinda weird, though perhaps a trenchant
commentary on media or something
Yes, that too. Star Wars would be less fun if the stormtroopers pleaded for their lives each time.
It availed her nothing and on a frosty day, the 8th December 1793,
the still lovely fifty year old former courtesan was loaded on to a
tumbrel and driven, crying and screaming through the streets of Paris to
the guillotine. The aristocratic victims of the Terror prided
themselves on their poise and haughty silence in the face of the baying
mob – not so Madame du Barry who broke down completely and appealed
ceaselessly to the crowds to rescue her from her fate in between
screaming and crying with fear.
It was already dusk by the time the tumbrel arrived at the Place de
la Révolution via its usual route along the Rue Saint Honoré. It was a
freezing cold December day and the crowd was perhaps a little more
sparse than usual due to the weather and the lateness of the hour but
there were still enough people curious enough to see the former King’s
favourite die for there to be a sizeable mob gathered to witness her
execution.
It must have been a relief to everyone involved to have finally made
it to the square but Madame du Barry’s ordeal was still not over as she
was carried down from the cart ‘more like a trapped animal than a human being‘
according to Joan Haslip then bundled up the scaffold steps still
screaming and crying out for mercy while the crowd stared in
astonishment. By this point the more hardened execution goers would have
seen several hundred people die before them but it seems that Madame du
Barry’s lack of poise and terrified cries of ‘You are going to hurt me!
Oh please do not hurt me!’ was something of a surprise.
Sensing the horrified restlessness of the crowd, the already brisk
executioner worked with even more speed than usual, hastily bundling the
struggling woman on to the guillotine and forcing her down on to the
plank as she begged him for ‘one moment more, please monsieur, do not
hurt me.’ When the knife finally crashed down there was one last awful
scream of terror before an uneasy silence fell across the square, broken
only by the executioner’s shout of ‘Vive la Révolution’ before the next
prisoner was hastened with rather more decorum up the slippery wooden
steps.
Madame Vigée-Lebrun, who knew Madame du Barry very well and painted her more than once was to write: ‘Madame
Du Barry … is the only woman, among all the women who perished in the
dreadful days, who could not stand the sight of the scaffold. She
screamed, she begged mercy of the horrible crowd that stood around the
scaffold, she aroused them to such a point that the executioner grew anxious and hastened to complete his task. This convinced me that if the
victims of these terrible times had not been so proud, had not met death with such courage, the Terror would have ended much earlier. Men
of limited intelligence lack the imagination to be touched by inner suffering, and the populace is more easily stirred by pity than by
admiration.’
Here’s something I wanna say real quick, while I’m feeling salty: Amazon has totally contributed to the devaluation of literature. Those prices you see, the $13 they’re asking you to pay for a hardcover book? Those are deep, DEEP discounts that they’re able to implement because they don’t collect sales tax if they can get away with it, they don’t contribute money to the communities where they have a physical presence, they have shitty labor practices, Jeff Bezos has more money than god, etc.
They’re so omnipotent at this point that they’ve normalized the discounted prices for books as the standard. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve had someone come up to me and tell me what the price on Amazon is, expecting me to match it. The number of times I’ve been told, “Oh, it’s cheaper on Amazon, I’ll just get it there.” Even at author events, where book sales DIRECTLY CONTRIBUTE to whether or not that bookstore will be able to get more authors in.
So when you go into a bookstore, and you’re asked to pay $27 for a hardcover, remember: THAT IS THE COVER PRICE. Set by the publishers. The bookstore is not upcharging you. They are asking you to pay the value of the book. Amazon’s low prices come with a cost. Please, just keep that in mind.
(I made a post with options for buying books online that aren’t Amazon. Check it out!)
This is a great post, and I just want to point out: publishers aren’t upcharging you either.
The cost of the book is the advance for the author, it’s the salaries for all the people who work on it (including editors, yes, but also designers and marketers and publicists and lawyers and accountants and everyone else who makes sure publishing works). It’s the cost of printing the books and the materials to print those books on and the warehouses to store those books in.
It’s keeping the literal lights on.
No one in the book business, from the author to the publisher to the bookseller, is making themselves rich off your money. This is the cost to survive. Amazon is running at a deficit because they can make up the cost with other things they do, and because once they run everyone else out of business, they’ll be the only game in town and can charge whatever they damn well please.
And please, please do not ask a bookstore (especially an indie bookstore) if they “price match.” It’s so insulting.
Amazon routinely sells books at or *below* wholesale cost. Meaning that when you ask a bookstore to ‘price match’ Amazon, you’re literally asking them to give you the book for free, or even take a financial loss on it.
‘So how can Amazon do it?’ you ask? The answer is Amazon does not care about losing money. It sells goods at a loss continuously. (Don’t believe me? Just search “Amazon quarterly losses” and you can find article after article about this) Why? Because its goal isn’t to sell the most things, it’s goal is to be the only place where you CAN buy things. They gouge prices on goods to a point where brick and mortar retailers absolutely cannot compete and they do it with the singular goal of eliminating competition.
Things have value. They represent many people’s time and labor. For books, specifically, they represent tremendous cultural worth that extends far beyond the value of the paper they’re printed on. We have to appreciate the value of goods and be willing to pay a fair price that will support and nurture industries.
It’s ok to be upset that you can’t afford $26 for a new hardcover, but make sure that that anger is directed, not at the people whose labor makes books possible, but at the people on top (like Jeff Bezos) who have devalued your own labor such that you can’t afford it.
^^^ if anyone is wondering this is LITERALLY the exact same strategy that Walmart used to destroy any small business and fuck over local economies.
Genuine question: Is directing my anger at the right people going to actually get me goods and services in the near to medium term?
Also, like, is, “Be angry at Jeff Bezos while not buying books” actually going to lead to good economic consequences for authors?
It’s funny how corporate greed now means not taking profits and price gouging means charging low prices.
This myth of companies trying to “corner the market” by sustaining losses until they drive out the competition, then jacking up the price has been around for over a hundred years.
Almost all purported cases are not really examples. For instance, the example of Wal-Mart used above. Has Wal-Mart run other companies out of business by undercutting them? Yes. Has Wal-Mart tried to jack up prices? No, it remains extremely cheap.
There have been a few cases where companies have tried this strategy. It does not work. You can’t make money by taking a loss on 99% of the market in order to try to run the other 1% out.
Amazon is an extremely profitable company, with quarterly profits in the billions. It used to lose money because it was constantly expanding.
It just occurred to me to wonder what it must be like to be an average person reading the newspaper headlines in NBC’s Hannibal during season 2. So, like, first the headlines are all FBI PROFILER SUSPECTED OF SECRETLY BEING CANNIBALISTIC SERIAL KILLER; CLAIMS PSYCHIATRIST FRAMED HIM, followed by FBI CONFIRMS THAT THE PROFILER, AND NOT THE PSYCHIATRIST, IS DEFINITELY THE CANNIBAL and then a few months later FBI CLEARS PROFLIER OF CANNIBALISM; SUSPECTS OTHER PSYCHIATRIST OF BEING THE CANNIBAL, and then finally, two stabbing, a throat slitting, and third psychiatrist out an upper-story window later, OOPS, IT WAS THE FIRST PSYCHATRIST ALL ALONG.
