Feeling Human Again
Jun. 24th, 2009 09:42 amYou know what? I think I feel human again. And to reinforce this feeling, it's a glorious summer's day, sunny and cloudless. With the exercise of a little willpower, I hope to get more than a little housework done.
Why, in words of Arabic origin, is "q" allowed to appear without the "u" that always accompanies it in English? I've been writing "burqua", but I notice most of you have it as "burqa". An alternative- justified by the practice of The Times, no less- is to go for a "k"- as in "burka". I think I prefer it. The "u"less "q" is unEnglish and my gorge rises at it. "Burka" still looks foreign, but less rule-slightingly so. I think I'll adopt it in future. Likewise I mean- if I can be bothered to remember this resolution- to refer to that book as "the Koran".
BBC 4 has a rather good series running about The PreRaphaelites- those English art revolutionaries who have always been immensely popular with the public but viewed a little sniffily by the sort of people who write histories of art. Last night, in episode 2, a strong case was made for regarding Ford Madox Brown as the first painter- anywhere, and a decade ahead of the French Impressionists- to paint human flesh in direct, out-doorsy sunlight. The painting in which he broke through the barrier has the unfortunate title (which has surely held it back) of "The Pretty Baa-Lambs". There's an image of it- merely adequate, but conveying some idea of the vibrancy of Brown's colour- here. I think it's true to say, as they were saying last night, that it's quite unlike anything that had been done before in European art.
Why, in words of Arabic origin, is "q" allowed to appear without the "u" that always accompanies it in English? I've been writing "burqua", but I notice most of you have it as "burqa". An alternative- justified by the practice of The Times, no less- is to go for a "k"- as in "burka". I think I prefer it. The "u"less "q" is unEnglish and my gorge rises at it. "Burka" still looks foreign, but less rule-slightingly so. I think I'll adopt it in future. Likewise I mean- if I can be bothered to remember this resolution- to refer to that book as "the Koran".
BBC 4 has a rather good series running about The PreRaphaelites- those English art revolutionaries who have always been immensely popular with the public but viewed a little sniffily by the sort of people who write histories of art. Last night, in episode 2, a strong case was made for regarding Ford Madox Brown as the first painter- anywhere, and a decade ahead of the French Impressionists- to paint human flesh in direct, out-doorsy sunlight. The painting in which he broke through the barrier has the unfortunate title (which has surely held it back) of "The Pretty Baa-Lambs". There's an image of it- merely adequate, but conveying some idea of the vibrancy of Brown's colour- here. I think it's true to say, as they were saying last night, that it's quite unlike anything that had been done before in European art.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-24 10:00 am (UTC)I assume you've seen the Pre-Raphaelite paintings in Manchester Art Gallery? They have a fine collection. Birmingham does too.
I find it ironic that they were criticised by contemporary reviewers as being too ugly and coarse and now they're criticised for being too idealised. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-06-24 10:31 am (UTC)I don't know why he gave the picture that silly title. It reeks of sentimentality, but the image itself- with its red-cheeked mother and starey-eyed baby- is far from sentimental. Perhaps he was being ironic.