{{ NUMOL BITES }}

haterina:

kimononono:

girl, who do you think you are, the queen of thailand?

oh my god the appropriation it is hideous

WHY

WHY

WHY

WHY

WHY

WHY

WHY

CRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

you know I like to imagine that this farang paid for the photoshoot and afterwards the people snickered about what farang are willing to pay for. It makes me feel better. Yeah.

Now see, if I wore anything like that in the UK, people would be shouting at me for being a fucking FOB, or fantasizing me as the ~*perfect traditional Oriental lady na kha*~. So I cannot enjoy beautiful Thai textiles.

;lkdjgl;kjglsdkjgs;dlgkjh cannot make words too grossed out

ฉัน…ไม่เข้าใจจริงๆ D:

/awaiting angry anons screaming about Thai curry 8D

Ugh gawd she looks so SMUG too.

(Source: , via torayot)

haterina:

tranzient:

samarasage:

is this supposed to be funny? I’m seeing all these notes about “japan lol” and isolationism. just because it’s not western doesn’t mean that it’s less important or less impressive than a David or a Hogarth. I assume this is intended to be insulting and belittling because the Japanese painting isn’t in a the ‘western tradition’ and because it looks different from something people in the west are used to looking at. if you’re able to, please make use of your public library at once and save yourselves some embarrassment in the future. also, whoever created this is probably an asshole. 

How dare the Japanese artist not draww like the Europeans? Doesn’t he know white is right?

I guess he will when Commodore Perry kicks down his door and eats his knees.

Oh, why, would you look at that - some perfect art history fail for you!

If you are able to source and date a series of paintings by dead white European men, can you also not do some basic research about Japanese painting and prints? I am sure it makes you feel ever so fancy to be able to chat shit about ~*~*art*~*~ (as long as it is the art by the dead white European men of course!) but, you know, some of the effort and time expended doing that could also be dedicated to learning about something called “Eurocentrism”.

The idea that White European Art flourishes and is ~great~ simply buys into a prescriptive and teleological narrative of art. White European Art progresses. It goes forwards — up, even! Ah, single-point perspective, modelling, naturalism, light, colour, history painting, the Lives of the Artists…

Now, in terms of the rest of the world of art out there (once we begrudgingly acknowledge it):

• The story of Indian art is written in decline. It goes backwards. Needs civilising imperial influence.
• The art of China is static and doesn’t go anywhere. It is an example of sino-stagnance.
• The art of Africa? What is that? Egypt isn’t a part of Africa, don’t be silly!
• Not quite yet sure about the rest of the continents so let’s just erase them.

If you actually believed any of that, you’re a victim of Eurocentric historiography. Unlearn it, please. De-colonise your mind.

Now, how can I put this in a way so as to not offend or un-nerve…?

I am not going to deny the historical fact of strict foreign policy. However, I do think much of the LOLJAPANESE coming from this is just whitey being miffed that someone doesn’t want whitey to come in and ransack their place willy-nilly. They’re just not used to this level of resistance to imperialism! Anyway, it wasn’t as if Japan was completely isolated or that contact with only whitey was restricted.

Now, in terms of the art: it is not due to some especial Oriental perversity/stagnance/decline that the Japanese people produced art using different artistic technique, different artistic aims, different relationship between artist and audience, different ways of consuming art.

I don’t want to frighten you with the idea that, um, Japan is kind of far away from Europe. Would they obliged produce art like the Europeans even if they were next-door neighbours? Perhaps.

The reason 18th century Europe had this sense of That Which is Art is because, well… European countries are relatively near each other. They had established centres of production such as London, Venice, Florence. Also it is relatively easier to travel, say, between England and Italy. Artists came and went from workshop to workshop, court to court. Artistic treatises were published and circulated, translated into different languages. The rich began to collect art in the early 17th century, creating a way of controlling and exhibiting taste and power. Also, the Royal Academy in London opened a few decades earlier than the paintings shown here, a place where artists studied and held exhibitions. There was a concern with a particular standard of excellence and a consciousness of creating oneself as an enlightened and much-patronised artist. So you see, there’s a particular world of art in Europe, mediated by the production and display of artwork.

Now, what countries are near Japan? China and Korea. Would it therefore be more reasonable to also look at them when evaluating how and why Japanese art came to look that way? Well, it would certainly be more rational than comparing it to European art just by some colonised aesthetic.

It shows huge history and geography fail to not take the above vague but basic background into account. If the person who made the graphic took a class in art history then I should like to box the tutor’s ears, that’ll learn them.

Shit, even I could be a better teacher!

Awesome haterina is awesome.  You’re a fair sight better than most teachers out there, I’ll bet, as well as better than the History Channel.

(via torayot)

nezua:

Let’s lecture China on human rights some more.

YES BECAUSE AMERICA FUCK YEAH

Reblog 4ever.

(Source: drinkthe-koolaid)