#Henri Milieu | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

wellntruly · 1 year

Text

M*A*S*H - Viewguide, S1

Are you interested in the long-running anti-war situation tragicomedy M*A*S*H (1972-1983), this one, but there are simply so many asterisks and so many episodes?

Well I can’t help you with the asterisks, but I can help you maximize your time.

I have started watching this program in between dozing on interesting painkillers after a gum surgery (“Stoned and watching MASH. How very 70s of you.” - my high school English teacher & former Marine captain) (“I think I’m now old enough to ponder the sexiness of Alan Alda” - also my former high school English teacher & Marine captain) (we text)—and I have a crackpot, out-of-order, reduced (like a gravy) viewing diet for you for Season 1. Future seasons on the way.

M*A*S*H - Season 1 Recommended sequence

1x15 ‘Tuttle’ - Television pilots think what they need to do is introduce you to all the characters, but in sitcoms they are wrong: they need to introduce you to the milieu—the said situation. That is where you are being invited to stay for the next however many years of these actors’ lives. Season 1, episode 15 'Tuttle' is a wonderful milieu-introducing episode. And you will still absolutely get an idea of who everyone is, during this mountingly absurd, perfectly contained episode about a character you do not need to know at all: the one & only (& imaginary) Captain Tuttle.

1x09 'Henry, Please Come Home' - Hey, here's another little secret: a storyline where things might be getting rearranged is a terrific way to show what everyone actually values, and will fight to keep. This is why the episode where Colonel Blake leaves is actually really well suited to an introductory episode. Additionally, you get everything from scruffy & disheveled Hawkeye & Trapper, sopping wet in a bathhouse Hawkeye & Trapper, and spiff & span in full uniform Hawkeye & Trapper. Get you men who can do it all.

1x06 ‘Yankee Doodle Doctor’ - In another world this is actually my pilot episode substitution, and you’ll understand why immediately. However, for a first impression it comes on a little strong—in multiple senses of the word, ho ho! My pet theory is that this is the episode that truly created M*A*S*H, with Alan Alda and Wayne Rogers just fully swinging a couple rungs up the Kinsey scale for a lark and then refusing to come back down from there, comedy bits that get broad enough to just skirt too much, and then it all crashing down into an ending that reminds us where they are, and why they're like this.

1x07 ‘Bananas, Crackers, and Nuts’ - Speaking of, let’s now indulge in a cracked showcase for our main man, our guy, Captain Benjamin Franklin 'Hawkeye' Pierce, “MD: manic depressive” (actually a line from 'Tuttle') (Tuttle!)

1x11 ‘Germ Warfare’ - Just a light & solid little episode with Pierce & McIntyre in fine duo form, ambling along an evergreen plot line: how can we bother Frank about it. This time: by literally stealing his blood. They vaant it! (For medicine.)

1x12 'Dear Dad' - I've come back to add this one back in. The structure this originated is just too integral to the M*A*S*H thing. Also the opening of Hawkeye, bundled up, sipping a martini and writing to his father under a mellow horn, is a cherished touchstone of this blog.

1x19 ‘The Longjohn Flap’ - Beautifully imagined antics episode for later in a season, where you can really capitalize on community dynamics. I love an Important Object moving through a large cast. I love watching people be comically cold. I love it!

1x21 ‘Sticky Wicket’ - An historic episode that years later actually led to House, M.D. I have no citation for that I just feel it to be true. It’s important for your show’s multifaceted longevity to also be confronted with Hawkeye’s obsessive, egotistical side—always there with a character like this, particularly a doctor character.

1x20 ‘The Army-Navy Game’ - Sublime. This does that bleak, Catch-22 style black comic military absurdism perfectly. The absolute pop the champagne we did it boys ~finale~ of the first season.

1x23 ‘Ceasefire’ - But also there's this one, that I do find has really lingered with me. There's something a little haunting about it. In short: a rumor takes off that there's going to be a ceasefire, and the only one who doesn't believe it is Trapper. A lot of the power of this episode probably comes from us knowing today that this is only the start of a war that's going to run for a decade. Aw honeys, you are not going home yet...

M*A*S*H is streaming in the U.S. (unconfirmed in other countries) on Hulu. The episodes are about 25 minutes. There is a laugh track. They were forced into one—you’ll notice they got a pass to drop it in the surgery scenes, marked as the dark jokes do not drop off entirely. I have been surprised to find I haven’t been much bothered by it, thought I would be. It often seems to just further underscore the wry surrealism of it all, or something almost theatrical/vaudeville in the comedy. The DVDs reportedly have an optional audio track without the canned laughter, and I am absolutely going to be picking up a season from our retro video rental shop to compare, once I can drive on nothing but ibuprofen. Will report back. As well as on: Season 2

Season 1 • To be continued

#M*A*S*H hours

#M*A*S*H hours #M*A*S*H #viewguides #Tarra watches #military rank bingo

141 notes · View notes

chic-a-gigot · 6 months

Text

La Mode nationale, no. 42, 19 octobre 1895, Paris. No. 1. — Corsage de visite. Chapeau de la Maison Moderne, 4, rue Halévy. — Corsage de Mme de Momigny, 17, boulevard Rochechouart. Bibliothèque nationale de France

No. 1. — Corsage de toilette en satin noir pékiné blanc. Corsage-blouse en velours noir, flottant sur la jupe, sous corsage boléro en satin blanc, brodé de perles et garni, à l'encolure décolletée, par une bande de plumes. Manches ballon à hauts poignets, relevées par une patte de satin blanc brodé avec bouton de strass. Tour de cou de plumes.

Chapeau Henri II en feutre blanc relevé par une touffe de pensées et orné en dessus par des plumes d'autruche noire, avec aigrette au milieu et large boucle à la base.

—

No. 1. — Ensemble bodice in black satin with white pekin. Black velvet blouse-bodice, floating over the skirt, under white satin bolero bodice, embroidered with pearls and trimmed, at the low-cut neckline, with a band of feathers. Balloon sleeves with high cuffs, raised by an embroidered white satin tab with rhinestone button. Feather choker.

Henri II hat in white felt raised by a tuft of pansies and decorated above with black ostrich feathers, with egret in the middle and large buckle at the base.

#La Mode nationale #19th century #1890s #1895 #on this day #October 19 #periodical #fashion #fashion plate #description #cover #bibliothèque nationale de france #dress #gigot #Modèles de chez #Maison Moderne #Madame de Momigny

13 notes · View notes

dk-thrive · 1 year

Text

Let’s dress ourselves with gentleness.

Once in a while we meet a gentle person. Gentleness is a virtue hard to find in a society that admires toughness and roughness. We are encouraged to get things done and to get them done fast, even when people get hurt in the process. Success, accomplishment, and productivity count. But the cost is high. There is no place for gentleness in such a milieu. Gentle is the one who does ‘not break the crushed reed, or snuff the faltering wick.’ Gentle is the one who is attentive to the strengths and weaknesses of the other and enjoys being together more than accomplishing something. A gentle person treads lightly, listens carefully, looks tenderly, and touches with reverence. A gentle person knows that true growth requires nurture, not force. Let’s dress ourselves with gentleness. In our tough and often unbending world our gentleness can be a vivid reminder of the presence of God among us.

— Henri Nouwen, Bread for the Journey. A Daybook of Wisdom and Faith. (HarperCollins, November 21, 2006) (via Alive On All Channels)

#Henri Nouwen #gentle #kind #empathy #peace

34 notes · View notes

quidfree · 7 months

Note

recently read a tsh fic where they genderbent francis, and i thought it was a kind of interesting premise. how do you think it would change the group dynamics in tsh?

it would change them a lot bc the tsh cast is one very ruled by class and gender norms of their epoch. a large part of francis’ identity is tied to him being a young gay man from a wealthy catholic family in the US in the 80s. a large part of richard/the reader’s relationship to him comes from richard’s own relationship to that identity and the way it challenges his self-perception.

group dynamics would be very thrown if camilla wasn’t The Girl. richard would still hone in on her bc shes got the whole renaissance cherub girlish tomboy with a twin thing going on but he would be more aware of his competing urge to sleep with francis (which would still obscurely distress him i like to believe). it would create more of an unspoken point of contention / vague frustration in general despite neither girl being the vocal feminist type just bc their presence would be more felt. bunny would feel more threatened and be nastier. charles would be worse to francis maybe but also maybe outright date her on and off with a more romantic bent to their situation. henry would be closest to the same but still a bit more paternalistic towards francis. id be curious as to how the francis camilla relationship changed bc my sense of them in canon is very cool girl x mean gay slightly patronising and safe but fairly real symbiosis. i think they’d be chafing more if they were on even footing, esp since the others would naturally group then together.

as for francis herself it’s hard to say how much of her would change entirely. impossible to escape the effects of gender in her milieu. would she be more or less like her mother? where would the most obvious changes come in? francis fucks but discreetly bc hes semi closeted as a safety precaution. would girl francis be more chill abt that maybe, or similar vibes bc of different kinds of social shaming? how would being a straight girl compare for her self understanding and presentation- would there be less of a cutting edge to her maybe, if she had less reason to keep her distances and sharpen her tongue? social status would cushion her personality to some extent. idk why but i feel like she would absolutely play men like fiddles (a skill francis also shares but can only weaponise in certain circumstances given his life), w less of camilla’s “boy’s girl” attitude and more of an interest in playing up femininity to get her way.

anyway interesting stuff! how did the fic you read deal with it?

#qui parle #qui repond #anon #tsh #papenathy #francis abernathy #see unlike my fem bakugou takes where fundamentally bakugou could easily be a girl and this would just add layers to canon #changing the identities of the tsh people causes upheaval to the whole dynamic of the group and whatnot #interesting how that plays out

11 notes · View notes

fotopadova · 2 months

Text

La fotografia documentaria come forma d’arte (sesta parte)

La fotografia umanista

di Lorenzo Ranzato

Introduzione

Con questo articolo completiamo il nostro racconto sul vasto mondo della fotografia documentaria, affrontando il significativo capitolo della fotografia umanista. Com’è facile intuire, la selezione degli argomenti e degli autori trattati è stata del tutto personale: quindi una scelta selettiva e parziale, che trascura inevitabilmente molti altri fenomeni del documentarismo che si sono manifestati nella seconda metà del ‘900.[1]

Come abbiamo visto, questo importante filone della fotografia del ‘900 si afferma a partire dagli anni ‘30, con un comune filo conduttore che può essere ben riassunto in questa frase: “il desiderio di vedere qualcosa riconosciuto come una realtà”[2]. Come ci segnala David Bate, questa aspirazione o volontà di raccontare in modo diretto (straight photography) il reale in tutte le sue manifestazioni “può includere approcci differenti, dove la verità è valutata in termini di interpretazione e rappresentazione”.

In effetti, seguendo il suo ragionamento, possiamo riconoscere all’interno del genere documentario la presenza di due tendenze diverse che si relazionano con il reale in modo oggettivo oppure soggettivo.[3]

A grandi linee, avremo un tipo di fotografia oggettiva o descrittiva che tende a porre un filtro tra fotografo e soggetto, cercando di mantenersi in una posizione neutrale senza farsi coinvolgere all’interno della scena ripresa. Questo tipo di fotografia è comune ad autori che abbiamo già conosciuto nelle precedenti puntate e che si esprimono con modalità espressive diverse: ci riferiamo a fotografi come Albert Renger-Patzsch o August Sander, oppure ai fotografi del Gruppo f/64.

1-Cartier-Bresson, foto da Images à la Sauvette 1952, “il libro” per eccellenza secondo Federico Scianna

Diversamente, la fotografia soggettiva o espressiva non pone barriere tra il fotografo e il soggetto, anzi vuole entrare dentro le cose che desidera raccontare, cercando di coinvolgere lo spettatore nella narrazione, pubblica o privata che sia. In questo filone molto variegato possiamo riconoscere le esperienze del documentario sociale (in particolare quella della Farm Security Administration) e più in generale quelle del fotogiornalismo – da Robert Capa, il più famoso fotoreporter di guerra, alla Bourke-Withe -, sino ad abbracciare la stagione d’oro della fotografia umanista che si afferma come “la tendenza dominante del documentario postbellico”[4].

A conclusione di questo breve riepilogo, segnaliamo che sul sito di Fotopadova è presente un contributo in due puntate di Guillaume Blanc, La storia della fotografia documentaria, tradotto e pubblicato da Gustavo Millozzi (a cui dedichiamo questo articolo). Una sua consultazione potrà essere utile per inquadrare l’argomento in una prospettiva temporale più allargata, che non solo riassume la storia del documentarismo sviluppatosi nel corso del ‘900, ma va anche alla ricerca dei precursori e di tutti quei fenomeni ragruppabili sotto l’etichetta di “documento”, che rappresenta fatti o persone reali oppure descrive avvenimenti storici.[5]

La fotografia umanista

“L'oggetto della fotografia è l'uomo, l'uomo e la sua vita breve, fragile, minacciata”.

La frase di Henri Cartier-Bresson, registrata in un’intervista del 1951 viene generalmente considerata da molti studiosi un modo per definire “la fotografia umanista”.[6]

2-Innamorati per le vie di Parigi, foto di Doisneau, Boubat e Izis.

In realtà, questo filone della fotografia soggettiva/espressiva, nasce all’interno del milieu fotografico francese degli anni ’30, dove un nutrito gruppo di fotografi condivide un comune interesse per l’uomo e le sue vicende di vita quotidiana. Particolarmente attenti alla vita della città, ci restituiscono “le figure di un’umanità autentica e sincera: uomini semplici, lavoratori e le loro famiglie di ceti modesti, bambini ricchi della loro innocenza e spontaneità solitaria, o coppie di innamorati rese migliori dalla forza dei loro sentimenti”.[7]

3-Brassaï, Paris de nuit, libro sulla vita notturna parigina.

La maggior parte dei fotografi umanisti condivide la professione di “reporter-illustratore”, ma ciò non toglie che molti di loro raggiungano lo status di fotografi-autori, grazie all’editoria che costituisce la parte più gratificante del loro lavoro. Valga per tutti il famoso libro fotografico Paris de nuit (1933) del fotografo ungherese Brassaï, che si stabilisce a Parigi nel 1924 dove frequenta l’ambiente surrealista e conosce Picasso. Dopo la seconda guerra mondiale “le flaneur des nuit de Paris” si trasformerà in un “globe-trotter”, grazie a una lunga e fruttuosa collaborazione con Harper’s Bazaar.[8]

4-Foto di bambini di Doisneau, Ronis, Izis e Boubat

Assieme a lui, ricordiamo i quattro più importanti rappresentanti della fotografia umanista francese: Robert Doisneau, Willy Ronis, Izis e Édouard Boubat che hanno in comune un grande amore per la città di Parigi e per le sue strade che diventano la principale scenografia dei loro scatti. Soprattutto a partire dalla fine della Seconda Guerra Mondiale, trasmettono al mondo “une certaine idée de la France”, attratti da quanto c’è di incanto o di mistero nei fatti quotidiani oppure alla ricerca di temi cari ad altre arti quali le canzoni, il cinema, la poesia e la letteratura.[9]

5-Doisneau Au Pont des Art 1953, Un regard oblique 1948

Ma per il pubblico restano due gli indiscussi protagonisti di quella stagione d’oro della fotografia: da un lato Robert Doisneau, con la sua visione del mondo romantica e compassionevole e il suo sguardo attento a cogliere lo spettacolo permanente della vita quotidiana, che trasforma le anonime persone della strada in attori naturali della commedia umana, trasfigurandoli spesso in figure fantastiche e oniriche [10]; dall’altro, Henri Cartier-Bresson, che nei diversi periodi della sua vita è sempre riuscito a rinnovare il suo sguardo sul mondo, tanto da essere definito l’occhio del secolo e considerato il massimo interprete del cosiddetto “realismo espressivo”, che si contraddistingue per la capacità di saper individuare e cogliere dentro il flusso ininterrotto del tempo l’istante decisivo.[11]

6- Cartier-Bresson, Hyères 1932, Ivry sur Seine 1955

Il movimento umanista inizia ad avere un certo seguito anche al di fuori della Francia a partire dagli anni ’50, come reazione al terribile dramma della seconda guerra mondiale, con la volontà di affermarsi nel resto del mondo come linguaggio universale accessibile a tutti.

Il movimento raggiunge il suo apice con la Mostra The Family of Man - organizzata da Edward Steichen al Museum of Modern Art di New York nel 1955 - che assume una risonanza planetaria, grazie ai suoi messaggi di fratellanza universale e di dignità dell’uomo, di speranza e di condivisione di un medesimo destino. È un progetto grandioso, costituito da 503 fotografie provenienti da 68 paesi diversi, che diventa la più grande manifestazione nella storia della fotografia e che verrà esposta negli anni successivi in molte parti del mondo.

7- The family of man, 1955

Alle fotografie di grandi autori come Ansel Adams, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Robert Doisneau, Édouard Boubat, Robert Capa, David Seymour, Bill Brandt, Elliott Erwitt, Eugene Smith, Robert Frank, August Sander, Sabine Waiss, Margaret Bourke-White, Richard Avedon, Garry Winogrand, si affiancano immagini di fotografi meno noti, mentre altre fotografie di Dorothea Lange e Russel Lee provengono dall’ archivio della Farm Security Administration, realizzato negli anni della Grande Depressione statunitense.

Come abbiamo già detto nell’introduzione, il movimento umanista diventa la principale espressione della fotografia a livello mondiale a cavallo degli anni ’50 e ’60, ma verrà ricordato anche come uno dei periodi più caratterizzanti della fotografia francese, che dagli anni ’30 fino agli anni ’60 ha avuto il suo centro indiscusso nella metropoli parigina.

8- The family of man, 1955

Gli anni del secondo dopoguerra sono caratterizzati da importanti trasformazioni politiche, sociali e culturali, dove il generale benessere dell’occidente, sostenuto dal boom economico, convive con “la guerra fredda” e il rischio nucleare. Ma già negli anni ’60 iniziano a manifestarsi fenomeni di crisi, alimentati anche dalla contestazione dei tradizionali valori borghesi da parte delle giovani generazioni in nome di una nuova ideologia libertaria: contestazione che raggiunge l’apice nel 1968, che verrà ricordato come l’anno delle grandi manifestazioni di piazza e degli scioperi dentro le fabbriche e le università.

Nello stesso tempo, con l’affermarsi del pensiero liberale e il propagarsi di nuove forme di consumismo, al di là dell’oceano gli Stati Uniti acquisiscono progressivamente un ruolo egemone a livello mondiale, diventando la principale forza trainante dell’economia di mercato, che porterà a radicali cambiamenti anche in ambito culturale.

In particolare nel campo delle arti visive, assisteremo a un grande sviluppo dell’arte e della fotografia americana - inizialmente influenzate da quella europea - che nel corso del tempo si imporranno autonomamente a livello internazionale. Con lo sviluppo dell’Espressionismo astratto (in particolare l’Action painting di Jackson Pollock) e con l’affermarsi di una particolare forma di street photography tipicamente americana, si aprirà una nuova stagione per le arti visive caratterizzata da una radicale trasformazione dei linguaggi, che segnerà una forte discontinuità con il passato.

Anche il mondo della fotografia a cavallo fra gi anni ’50 e ’60 dovrà affrontare una vera e propria “rivoluzione visiva” attuata da Robert Frank con il suo libro The Americans: dalla critica Frank verrà considerato come l’anticipatore di un nuovo linguaggio che sovverte radicalmente i paradigmi che hanno contraddistinto l’estetica e le più tradizionali forme espressive della fotografia umanista, un linguaggio “informale” che ancor oggi possiamo riconoscere in molte manifestazioni della fotografia contemporanea.[12]

---- [1] Ci riferiamo in particolare a quanto già scritto in un mio precedente articolo pubblicato il 18 giugno 2021: I territori del “fotografico”: pittorialismo, documentarismo, concettualismo. Documentarismo va inteso nello specifico significato che gli attribuisce David Bate nel suo libro La fotografia d’arte, (Einaudi, 2018). Bate prova a reinterpretare il mondo della fotografia, della sua storia e dei suoi autori attraverso tre categorie del fotografico - pittorialismo, documentarismo e concettualismo -, entro le quali circoscrivere i diversi comportamenti della fotografia, così come si sono evoluti a partire dalle origini sino ai giorni nostri: comportamenti che di volta in volta hanno assunto proprie specificità linguistiche e poetiche e che, a mio avviso, in alcuni casi hanno avuto modo di contaminarsi o ibridarsi, soprattutto nella più recente fase della contemporaneità.

[2] David Bate, Photography. The Key Concepts, 2016, Trad. it. Il primo libro di fotografia, Einaudi, 2017, p. 89.

[3] Bate, op. cit. p. 83.

[4] Bate, op. cit. p. 68.

[5] Gli articoli sono stati pubblicati rispettivamente il 10 dicembre 2022 e il 23 gennaio 2023. Il testo originale è consultabile al seguente indirizzo: https://www.blind-magazine.com .

[6]Ricordiamo che sul sito di Fotopadova ci sono diversi articoli che trattano della fotografia umanista, articoli rintracciabili con una ricerca dal menu collocato in alto a sinistra: Edouard Boubat, sguardo di velluto di Marie d'Harcourt, da: https://www.blind-magazine.com/news/edouard-boubat-a-velvet-gaze/ (trad. Gustavo Millozzi); Henri Cartier-Bresson: “Non ci sono forse - vivere e guardare”, da https://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/ (trad. Gustavo Millozzi); Adolfo Kaminsky: la Parigi “umanista” e popolare (seconda parte) di Lorenzo Ranzato; Templi, Santuari, Cappelle e capitelli della Fotografia: 2, Casa dei Tre Oci a Venezia:“Esposizione” di WillY Ronis, di Carlo Maccà; Sabine Weiss, ultima fotografa umanista, di Gustavo Millozzi.

[7] Si veda: La photographie humaniste sul sito del Ministero della Cultura francese-Biblioteca nazionale di Francia: https://histoiredesarts.culture.gouv.fr/Toutes-les-ressources/Bibliotheque-nationale-de-France-BnF/La-photographie-humaniste-1945-1968.

[8] Brassaï, Photo Poche n. 28, 2009, con introduzione di Roger Grenier e un’ampia bibliografia alla fine. La collezione di questi agili ed economici libretti tascabili, pubblicati dal Centre national de la photographie, presenta un vastissimo catalogo di fotografi con più di 150 titoli.

[9] La photographie humaniste, cit. Segnaliamo anche il libro La photographie humaniste, 1945-1968: Autour d'Izis, Boubat, Brassaï, Doisneau, Ronis..., Catalogo della Mostra omonima, a cura di Laure Beaumont-Maillet e Françoise Denoyelle, con la collaborazione di Dominique Versavel, ed. Biblioteque Nationale de France, 2006

[10] Fra i molti libri si veda il recente: Robert Doisneau, Catalogo della Mostra a cura di Gabriel Bauret, Rovigo 23 settembre 2021-30 gennaio 2022, Silvana Editoriale 2021.

[11] Fra l’immensa bibliografia consigliamo la lettura del libro tascabile: Henri Cartier-Bresson, Gallimard 2008, con testi di Clément Chéroux, storico della fotografia e conservatore per la fotografia al Centro Pompidou. Alla fine, oltre ad un’ampia bibliografia, sono riportati alcuni testi e aforismi di HCB. Ricordiamo una delle sue celebri frasi: “Scattare una fotografia significa riconoscere, simultaneamente e in una frazione di secondo‚ sia il fatto stesso sia la rigorosa organizzazione delle forme visivamente percepite che gli conferiscono significato. È mettere testa, occhio e cuore sullo stesso asse”.

[12] Per un approfondimento si rinvia a: Claudio Marra, Fotografia e pittura nel Novecento (e oltre), Mondadori, 2012. Particolarmente interessanti i capitoli: Sull’onda dell’informale e La grande armata delle avanguardie che racconta il rapporto fra mezzo fotografico e i nuovi fenomeni artistici della Body Art, Narrative Art e Conceptual Art che si affermano nel corso degli anni ’70.

#lorenzo ranzato #gustavo millozzi

2 notes · View notes

mask131 · 10 months

Text

Occult Paris (2-A)

In the spring of 1948, three sisters – Leah, Margaret and Kate Fox, living in a rural town near Rochester in the state of New-York – claimed to have communicated with the dead, thanks to a turning table. People became obsessed with this trio of mediums and their poltergeists, and this was the start of the “spiritism craze”. This passion for communicating with the spirits soon reached Europe – and nor France, nor its capital Paris escaped it. In the upper classes of the capital, or in the “avant-garde milieu”, everybody tried to invoke the souls of the deceased inside tables for a little chat. Turning tables became one of the main entertainments of the time – or rather, a “spiritual sport”. It was the “greatest phenomenon” of the century, for many. But for the Church of France, it was something quite different… To quote the Chevalier Gougenot des Mousseaux, in his “La magie au dix-neuvième siècle” (Magic in the 19th century), “Magic, magnetism, somnambulism, spiritism, hypnotism – they are all but Satanism!”. The situation was taken very seriously by the religious authorities, to the point that the abbot Mautain, vicar of the archdiocese of Paris and doctor in theology, published a text tiled “Avertissement aux Chrétiens sur les tables tournantes”, “Warning for Christians about turning tables”. In it he described his experience seeing one day a basket twist itself “like a snake” and flee by crawling in front of a Gospel. The abbot Chevrojon, vicar of Saint-Roch, rather confessed having to battle against a “possessed stool”. For all the men of God of the time, spiritism was the work of the devil. As for the scientists of the Académie des sciences, it was all just charlatanism. For these rational and rigorist scholars, these tables could only turn through magician tricks, or by the subconscious muscular impulsions of the participants. For them, it was all just collective hallucinations, or autosuggestions.

But despite all the condemnations, despite all the warnings, despite all the debunking, people never stopped being obsessed with spiritism. In 1856, the emperor Napoléon III himself received officially in the Tuileries the Scottish medium Daniel Dunglas Home. During the séance they organized, a tale, several chairs and several furniture pieces started to float, while a host of famous spirits were invoked: Hortense de Beauharnais, Napoléon Ier, Marie-Antoinette, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Blaise Pascal! But Home wanted to impress his imperial hosts too much, and this was his downfall: he was proven a fake when the Imperial Court went with him to Biarritz. There, “ghost hands” caressed the face of the empress Eugénie – but it was revealed to be the foot of the medium, wearing a glove! As it turns out, Home wasn’t a medium but a talented illusionists and hypnotists. Home was asked to leave France immediately – but despite this disgrace at the highest level of the government, secret societies and occult organizations of all sorts kept flowering and multiplying throughout France: spiritualists, theosophists, martinists, Rosicrucians, kabbalists, gnostics, neo-pagans, luciferians, Satanists… But three men in particular became extremely famous.

1) Allan Kardec

Born in Lyon in 1804, Hippolyte Léon Rivail settled at a very young age in Paris, where he opened a school (35, rue de Sèvres) where he taught based on the modern methods of the Swiss pedagogue Jean-Henry Pestalozzi, himself a fervent follower of Rousseau’s theories. Unfortunately, Rivail’s schools barely hold for a few years before closing – Rivail switched to the writing of manuals of grammar, arithmetic, chemistry and biology. It is when he was writing a chapter about the magnetism of animals that a friend of his told him about his personal “table experience”. Rivail had reached his fifties when he first took part in a séance of turning tables. He soon regularly visited these mediumnic séances – one rue de la Grange-Batelière, another rue Tiquetonne, a third rue de Rochechouart… One medium claimed that Rivail was actually the reincarnation of an old Breton druid by the name of Allan Kardec – and so the former teacher took this pseudonym as his new name. In 1857, the “new” Allan Kardec published the first and the most famous of his books, “Le Livre des Esprits”, The Book of Spirits, that he claims to have written under the command of… spirits! On the first day of April 1858, he creates in his home (8, rue des Martyrs) la Société spirite de Paris (The Spiritualist Society of Paris), and a newspaper by the name of “La Revue spirite” (The Spiritualist Review). Since his apartment becomes too small to welcome his many friends and disciples, Allan Kardec starts hosting reunions at the Palais-Royal, first in the galerie de Valois, than in the galerie Montpensier, and finally at the rue Sainte-Anne. Kardec created a true religion, whose influenced reached all of Europe – and even Brazil! He wrote many, many books: Qu’est-ce que le spiritisme? (What is spiritism?), Instruction pratique sur les manifestations spirites (Pratical instructions about spiritualist manifestations), Le Livre des médiums (The Book of mediums), L’Evangile selon le spiritism (The Spiritism Gospel), Le Ciel et l’Enfer ou La Justice Divine (Heaven and Hell, or the Divin Justice), and finally, La Genèse, les Miracles et les Prédictions selon le spiritisme (The Genesis, the Miracles and the Predictions according to spiritualism). In 1869, Allan Kardec did not die – but rather was “disembodied”, and his empty body buried in the Père-Lachaise cemetery. His grave, in the shape of a dolmen, is still one of the most famous tombstones of the entire cemetery.

2) Éliphas Lévi

Eliphas Lévi was the man who invented in the French language the word “occultisme”, “occultism”. Born Alphonse-Louis Constant in 1810, in the Odéon neighborhood, son of a shoemaker, he soon enters the seminary of Saint-Sulpice and he could have become a priest… if only he could “keep it in his pants”, if you excuse the expression. Young Constant was sent to a young girl’s house to catechize her, only for him to seduce and flirt with her – which officially put an end to his possible priestly career. His mother, who was a very pious woman, was so despaired and heartbroken by this she killed herself. Gifted for drawing, the young Constant started to live and work in artists studios, while enjoying a very lustful and un-chaste life. He notably was the lover of Flora Tristan, a socialist and feminist activist who would later become famous for being the grandmother of Paul Gauguin. Constant then became part of the staff of the collège oratorien de Juilly – and it was during this time that he wrote his first book, La Bible de la liberté (The Bible of freedom).

As soon as it was published, the book was pulled out of libraries, forbidden from being published, and both the author and edtor were summoned in the assize court of Paris for “attack against the public and religious property and moral”. Constant was locked up in the Sainte-Pélagie prison for eleven months, and when he got out he married Marie-Noémie Cadiot, an eighteen year old woman (he was over thirty!). He wrote a pamphlet called “La Voix de la famine” (The Voice of famine), and he was once again condemned to one year of prison. He however only did half of his time in prison – which allowed him to participate in the revolution of February 1848. He was now a wanted man – in fact, a revolutionary who happened to look like him was shot dead rue Saint-Martin! A few years later, in the 120 boulevard du Montparnasse, he wrote the book that truly started his legend: Dogme et rituel de la haute magie (Dogma and ritual of the high magic). To publish this book he took the pseudonym of Éliphas Lévi, which was the Hebraic translation of Alphonse-Louis. In this book, the author created the portrait of a fantastical creature that was then copy-pasted and spread through the press: Baphomet, the so-called idol worshiped by the Templar Knights. Lévi described the creature as having the head of a goat, the breast of a woman, hooves, wings, and a pentagram on the forehead – sitting cross-legged while flames burn over its head. After this first success, Lévi kept producing best-sellers: Histoire de la magie (History of magic), La Clef des grands mystères (The Key of great mysteries), La Science des esprits (The Science of spirits), Le Grand Arcane (The Great Arcana)… Admired by the occultists of his time, he regularly gave tarot readings or chiromancy readings, and he started practicing alchemical experiments. He became friend with Alexandre Dumas, wrote several songs, became a guest in several literary salons, and he even was presented to Victor Hugo throughout the daughter of Théophile Gautier, Judith Gautier. He died in 1875 and was buried in the cemetery of Ivry.

3) Papus

Born in Spain of a French father and Spanish mother, Gérard Encausse was just a child when his parents settled in Montmartre. He had a pretty normal childhood at the Rollin school (today’s Jacques-Decour highschool), where he had already created an esoteric journal and a secret society with other teenagers. Becoming a medicine student, he actually spends most of his time studying divinatory arts, the tarot, the Kabbalah, and the arts of chiromancy, numerology and hypnosis. He takes the pseudonym of “Papus”, the name of a genius doctor of Antiquity. Papus was a “bon vivant”, as we say in France, a man who enjoyed all the pleasures of life and hanged out with the bohème of Montmartre – he notably spent a lot of time in Le Chat noir cabaret. Papus was for a time part of the Theosophical Society created in the United-States by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, but he soon decided to stay independent and create his own organization. Or rather, re-crate, as he resurrected l’Ordre martiniste (The Martinist Order), inspired by the mage of the 18th century, Martinès de Pasqually. The first Martinist loge was in the 24, rue Pigalle. Papus had a clear sense of hierarchy and of mise en scène: as the leader of the Order, he goes by the title “The Unknown Philosopher”, while his right hands take titles such as “The Unknown Brother”, “The Initiated Brother”, “The Associated Brother”. During their ceremonies, the members of the Order wear a red dress, a black silk mask and Egyptian cloth-strips similar to the one wrapping up mummies, while holding a sword. In its peak, the Order had twenty thousand members spread across Europe, Russia and the United-States.

Papus worked however outside of his personal organization: he also worked to rebuild the ancient brotherhood of the Kabbalistic Rose Cross. In 1889, he participates to the first International Spiritualist Congress, that takes place in Paris, rue Cadet, while also founding the GIEE – the Groupe indépendant d’études ésotériques (The Independent Group of Esoteric Studies), which is opened by a conference at the 44, rue Turbigo, and which gathers all of the spiritualists of Paris. All the disciples participating to this opening conference notably obtain a diploma. The next yar, Papus creates with the poet Lucien Chamuel “la librairie du Merveilleux”, the book-shop of the Marvelous, 29 rue de Trévise. In the back-room, Papus and his friend work on creating their journal “L’Initiation”, that Rome itself blacklisted, their monthly publication L’Union occulte (The Occult Union), as well as their weekly “Le Voile d’Isis” (The Veil of Isis), and various almanacs. It was also in the backroom of the bookshop that you could find the seat of La Faculté libre des sciences hermétiques (The Free Faculty of Hermetic Sciences).

In 1902, Papus and Lucien Chamuel sell the book-shop of the Marvelous to open a new bookshop, this one called “librairie d’Hermétisme” (Bookshop of Hermetism), at the 3 and 5 rue de Savoie – plus an annex rue Séguier. By now, the personal office of the occult master looked like an Egyptian temple: he notably wrote there many of the 160 various texts that were attributed to him. In 1905, the tsar Nicolas II invites him to Saint-Petersburg for a spiritism séance: it was said that during this meeting, the French wizard managed to invoke the ghost of Alexandre III (which, according to the rumors, made Rasputin very jealous). In June of 1908, Papus gathers at Paris the Spiritualist Congress, gathering thirty thousand members from all of Europe – it took place in the salle des Sociétés savants, in the 8th of rue Danton. During the Great War, Papus was named chief-physician paramedic, but he did not survive the war, dying of tuberculosis before the end of the conflict. Some whispered that he might have been cursed by an envious Rasputin…

Some additional notes, to understand the Papus article:

# Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, born in Russia, founded in New-York in 1875 the Theosophical Society, which soon spread world-wide. Her teachings were a syncretism of Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianism and esoteric thinking. In Paris, the theosophy received its first disciples in 1883. A journal, Le Lotus Bleu (The Blue Lotus) was founded. The seat of the French Theosophical Society was at the 4, square Rapp, in the seventh arrondissement.

# Jacques Martinès de Pasqually, a Portuguese Jew that converted himself to Catholicism, travelled in France in 1750 and founded there the society of the Order of the Mason Knights elected Cohen (Cohen, in Hebrew, meaning “priests”). Louis Claude de Saint-Martin, nicknamed “The Unknown Philosopher”, was his secretary. The Martinist Order, or Martinism, offered to its adepts to become “beings of God” by mixing spirituality and magic.

# The Rose Cross is a secret and mystic brotherhood created by Christian Rosenkreutz in Germany in the 17th century. Very soon, it became a phenomenon in Paris. The Rosicrucian Order preaches justice and truth.

#occult paris #occultism #esoteric #paris #french history #secret societies #baphomet #papus #eliphas levi #allan kardec #spiritism #medium #séance #magic #nineteenth century #19th century

6 notes · View notes

aurevoirmonty · 3 months

Text

Je porte sur moi ce mal de la France, que personne que moi ne porte. Au milieu de ceux qui dorment et au milieu de ceux qui rient. Dormez, vous qui êtes faite pour dormir. Riez, vous qui êtes faite pour rire. Rire, moi, je ne le peux plus ; je ne le pourrai plus jamais. Et dormir… Le malheur de la France me réveille la nuit. Aimer son pays est un état qui ne se connaît que par la douleur.

Henry de Montherlant

2 notes · View notes

ardenrosegarden · 1 year

Text

From the dawn of the 10th century to the twilight of the 12th century, the Normans constantly advanced their chess pieces towards Brittany, making the northeast of Rennes the most exposed area. And the raids were numerous. Without going into detail, we will recall that in 936, Duke Alan fought against a Norman colony settled in the monastery of Dol-de-Bretagne. In 944, Flodoard noted that the Normans took advantage of the internal Breton conflicts to seize Dol, whose archbishop was killed during a rush in his cathedral. In 996, at the request of Duke Richard II, Olaf landed from Ireland and the Hebrides, where he was king, to take, pillage and burn Dol. Barely fifteen years later, in 1014, Olaf Haraldson, once again in connection with the Norman duke, seized the archiepiscopal city. Following a period of precarious balance between Richard II and Alain III, mentioned above, this phase can almost pass for an interval of appeasement. In 1030, the Breton prince launched an assault on the southern Channel, without success. Thirty years later, in 1064, William of Normandy attacked Dol, this episode featured on the Bayeux Tapestry. The Conqueror returned in 1076 and 1086, with no more success. We will have the opportunity to recall it later, but in 1166 and 1173, during the conflicts between Henry II Plantagenet and Raoul II of Fougères, Dol will again be at the heart of the tensions; and, in 1203, John Lackland burned down the cathedral. The following year, when Normandy became French, the threat ceased for a time.

This eventful detour aims to show that every twenty or thirty years, the Normans carried out raids against north-eastern Brittany. While it may be adventurous to provide a single hypothesis for all these attacks, one cannot help but think that such a frequency suggests that the Norman dukes thought of making this sector a march, a buffer zone between their state and the Breton province. The foundation of Fougères cannot be explained solely by a county policy of fortification during the 1040s; even if it must be admitted, the first half of the 11th century saw the construction of numerous fortresses on the Norman side.

Julien Bachelier, Une histoire en Marche : Fougères et la Normandie au Moyen Âge (début XIe-milieu XIVe siècle)

#fougères #tenth century #eleventh century #twelfth century #(feel like I should add the disclaimer that there was a mutual sometimes-hostile-sometimes-symbiotic relationship bw fougères and normandy #tdlr fougères was in a geographical and political in-between bw brittany and normandy)

9 notes · View notes

abridurif · 6 months

Text

Qu’il dorme ou qu’il veille, qu’il courre ou qu’il marche, qu’il utilise un microscope, un télescope ou l’œil nu, l’homme ne découvre jamais rien, ne dépasse jamais rien, ne laisse jamais rien derrière lui, sinon lui-même. Quoi qu’il dise, quoi qu’il fasse, il ne rend compte que de lui-même. S’il est amoureux, il connaît l’amour, s’il est au Ciel, la félicité, s’il est en Enfer, la souffrance. Son état spécifique détermine sa localisation. La principale, la seule chose qu’un homme puisse façonner est son état, ou encore son destin. Néanmoins, la plupart du temps, il n’en a pas conscience et ne signale pas cette activité au moyen d’un panneau qui dirait : « Ici s’accomplit et se répare ma propre destinée » (et non pas la vôtre). Il est pourtant passé maître dans cette tâche et s’y consacre 24 heures par jour pour la mener à bien. Quand bien même il négligerait ou saboterait tout le reste, on n’a jamais vu personne négliger cet ouvrage-là. Nombreux sont ceux qui prétendent que leur occupation principale consiste à fabriquer des souliers et qui réfuteraient avec mépris l’idée qu’ils ont leur part de responsabilité dans ces temps difficiles qu’ils subissent. Tout effort tendu vers quelque chose, toute aspiration, est un instinct qui reçoit assistance et collaboration de toute la nature et, en cela, il ne saurait être inutile. Hélas, chaque relâchement dans l’effort, chaque marque de désespoir est également un instinct. Il faut un courage exemplaire pour être actif, en bonne condition et heureux. Être prêt à se battre en duel ou à livrer bataille implique du désespoir, ou bien c’est que vous faites peu de cas de votre vie. Si vous considérez votre existence à la façon des vieilles gens religieux (j’entends par là ceux qui ont fait leur temps et qui sont montés en graine au milieu de la sécheresse, de simples galles humaines inoculées jadis par le diable en personne), alors tout ce qu’il y a en vous de joie et de sérénité disparaîtra et vous en serez réduit à faire contre mauvaise fortune bon cœur. Le fait est que vous devez prendre le monde sur vos épaules, comme Atlas, et progresser avec lui. Vous y parviendrez au nom d’une idée et vous y réussirez en proportion de l’attachement que vous portez à celle-ci. Il se peut que de temps à autre votre dos ait à en souffrir mais vous éprouverez en revanche la satisfaction de le suspendre ou de le faire tourner à votre guise. Les lâches souffrent, les héros prennent du plaisir. Lorsque vous aurez marché avec lui pendant une longue journée, installez-le dans un creux, asseyez-vous à côté et mangez votre dîner. Vous verrez qu’à l’improviste vous serez dédommagé de votre effort par quelques pensées d’un genre immortel. Le talus sur lequel vous êtes assis se couvrira de parfums et de fleurs et, dans ce creux, votre monde deviendra une gazelle légère, au pelage luisant. Henry D. Thoreau, Concord, 20 mai 1860

#henry david thoreau #atlas

4 notes · View notes

breadvidence · 6 months

Text

Notes on '34 part I—and no, I shouldn't admit to watching a 4hr 40min film twice in a week, but I've only got access to Criterion for the free trial period, and anyway I wanted to. As I said re: part III, solid adaptation overall. It starts less fun than it gets, keeping close enough to the novel as to not surprise you—it's not until part II that we get anything of that sort.

The innkeeper at the beginning has seen a lot of convicts pass through with their end-of-sentence payout, hasn't he? His estimate of the time it took Jean Valjean to earn his money is off by five years, and he exclaims over it, but he's not surprised to see a rough man carrying so much in funds. And he's not particularly alarmed over a threat of violence, either. He's an attempted cheat (because innkeeper, one presumes), but he's also helpful, a combination of fallibility and kindness which will run throughout this adaptation (an aside: I'm debating whether Jean Valjean's "early" release—less than a month's difference from the original sentence—for his feat with the caryatid counts as a sign of this version's kinder milieu, or if it's an insult).

I personally wouldn't have a violent overturning of the spirit due to Henry Krauss' bland Myriel but YMMV. Anyway, the bishop specifically purchasing Valjean's soul is one of my pet details and whenever an adaptation misses it I always get a little fussy.

Valjean tears up his passport and I am immediately transported, I hear strains of music, I expect him to break out in a fine tenor—another story must begiiiiIIIIIN.

"What's the police view of all this, M. Javert?" "Fine and dandy, my dear notary. Fine and dandy. We'll see how things progress." — that's Fauchelevent, right? Is this the two people who hate Valjean being sarcastic and bitchy together about his inauguration as mayor? I think it is. Look, even Javert gets to have a friend in this adaptation. (It's my impression, at least, that there's enough of a time lapse between this scene and the cart for Fauchelevent to have come down in the world.)

Speaking of the cart: the dynamic between Valjean and Javert here is comedy. Valjean is irritable and dismissive—there's an ongoing fucking crisis and you are unhelpful, says his expression. Because he doesn't engage Javert when baited, it makes Javert's commenting on some man he used to know seem even more of an inappropriate waste of time than the usual—and Baur's loud "eh?" in response says as much. Javert's fixed stare, the back half-turned towards the cart—it's inappropriate. Instead of a threat, he comes across as a weird asshole. (As an aside, their "bonjour, Javert" "bonjour, M. le Maire" exchange, occurring as it does between tenser dialogue, teeters between silly and indicative of a whole interpersonal history—not a fond one, you can derive; this is productive, because we haven't otherwise seen these two interact.) (As a second aside, this scene is entirely different in tone from the Brick, but I don't like it any less for that; Baur is a brusque, irritable Valjean, and I can't imagine him wearing "an indescribable expression of happy and celestial suffering" [I.V.VI]).

The forewoman's discovery that Fantine has a daughter and Fantine's dismissal is really one scene, but the continuous action is interrupted by the cart sequence, an odd bit of storytelling—I'd say the movie really wants us to draw a connection between her secret being outed and Valjean evidencing his past. It's a little forced.

"She'll find [the francs]. Take it from me. Sure, she'll have to stoop a bit to pick them up. But she'll stoop, and once she starts..." Solid-ass villainy from Thénardier.

I want to have a considered opinion on Florelle's Fantine but she persists in coughing without covering her mouth and this completely eclipses everything else about the role for me. Can't handle it.

This is among the adaptations which make Javert informing against Madeleine a consequence of the cart scene rather than their conflict over Fantine. There's a coherent storytelling reason for this change having to do with the alterations the majority of these movies make to his character; that's a whole post of its own.

Two scenes later, Javert tells Valjean "Two weeks ago, after the incident with Fantine, I was furious and I denounced you"—it's a confusing fuck-up. The film is following the book closely here, would've had to alter the dialogue to match its own events, and simply didn't. Taking it on its own feet, you have to decide whether you think Javert is lying (why?), so flustered he has misspoken (??), or is experiencing some kind of mental lapse (???). Further, you've got him standing there, sweaty, jittery, in a state, over something he's known for—well, an ambiguous amount of time, but since he received his response from Paris in the same scene as Fantine's arrest, and we have since seen the Thénardiers receive and spend 300 of Valjean's francs, at least several days. He knows more about Champmathieu than he could have from the letter we saw, and in the novel he's been to see him, but the movie isn't explicit on the point, so the reason for delay is unclear. Mess. (All that aside, solid punish me m. le maire sequence—it's pulled more than less directly from the novel with intelligent abridgedment, starring a less conciliatory Valjean and the world's most uncomfortable Inspector Javert. Vanel's throat-clearing foot-shuffling entrance and Baur's bitchy refusal to acknowledge him is quality cinema.)

It's a fine tempête and trial, idk. Baur plays an acceptable Champmathieu, less nuanced than his Valjean, flirting with that edge of comedy which can tip the character into being uncomfortable—some of these adaptations you don't know if the show expects you to laugh along with the crowd in the courtroom.

Charles Vanel remains the most awkward Javert, even as the music in Fantine's sickroom swells and beats a dramatic villainous theme; it's something about his body language. He behaves himself uncommonly well for the character, doffing his hat in the presence of death. '34 really can't commit to the idea of his villainy in the way other adaptations do (see '78 and '98 in a big way), and it even stops short of laying Fantine's death at his feet. All in all a weirdly bland death scene. (By the by, while I enjoy Vanel and think he's a solid actor, he's not physically imposing—this isn't someone who can easily project threat like a Toulout or Quast. There's even a hapless edge to him. I get shades—bizarrely—of Crowe?)

#les misérables 1934 #les mis

3 notes · View notes

chic-a-gigot · 2 years

Photo

La Mode nationale, no. 391, 21 octobre 1893, Paris. No. 1. Toilettes d'automne. Modèles de la Maison Charpantier, 27, rue du Château-d'Eau, à Paris. — Chapeau de la Maison Nouvelle, rue de la Pais, à Paris. Bibliothèque nationale de France

Explication de gravures:

(1) Double collet-étole en velours mauve, bordé d'un galon de jais. Autour du cou, ruche Henri II, mélangée de jais. Chapeau ondulé, en velours, orné d'un chou semblable sur le côté et de deux longues coques droites.

(1) Double collar-stole in mauve velvet, edged with a jet braid. Around the neck, Henri II ruching, mixed with jet. Wavy hat, made of velvet, decorated with a similar cabbage on the side and two long straight shells.

—

(2) Costume d'automne, en velours marron rosé et lainage broché. Corsage en lainage, orné d'une pèlerine froncée, en velours, garnie de chinchilla. Manches gigot en velours; grandes basques semblables retombant à mi-jupe cloche. Petit boa de chinchilla. Chapeau rond, en velours marron, doublé de rose. Grand fouillis de velours rose s'étendant sur les côtés, avec plume d'autruche au milieu.

(2) Autumn suit, in pinkish brown velvet and brocaded woolen fabric. Woolen bodice, adorned with a gathered pelerine, in velvet, trimmed with chinchilla. Velvet gigot sleeves; large similar tails falling halfway up the bell skirt. Little chinchilla boa. Round hat, in brown velvet, lined with pink. Large tangle of pink velvet extending to the sides, with ostrich feather in the middle.

Métrage: 9 mètres lainage, grande largeur; 7 mètres velours.

#La Mode nationale #19th century #1890s #1893 #periodical #fashion #fashion plate #description #Bibliothèque nationale de France #dress #collar #cape #gigot #Modèles de chez #Maison Nouvelle #Maison Charpantier #jet #autumn

38 notes · View notes

omniversalobservations · 1 year

Photo

Canceled Batman/Indiana Jones Crossover is DC’s Biggest Missed Opportunity

Brash, innovative and often controversial, Howard Chaykin has had a 40-year career in comics, with works like American Flagg and his revamps of The Shadow and Blackhawk solidifying his legacy in the industry. It’s easy to see why Chaykin would have been the first choice for a Batman/Indiana Jones team-up. Chaykin has a long history with Batman, first drawing the character in a 1974 issue of Detective Comics and producing a number of classic stories in the decades since. Chaykin also briefly worked on Indiana Jones, drawing the sixth issue of Marvel’s The Further Adventures of Indiana Jones in the 1990s and providing a number of covers for the series thereafter.

In a 2012 interview with the Indycast, Chaykin dropped the bombshell that he had been hired to write and draw an Indiana Jones/Batman crossover sometime around 2009-2010. “It was gonna be a four-issue series,” Chaykin explains, before elaborating that the story would have taken place in 1939 and concerned Indy investigating “reports of a mysterious bat-winged, man-sized figure haunting Gotham City.” Chaykin goes on to spell out the rest of the overall plot, which sounds like a typical comic book team-up: “The first issue would be Indiana tracking down this mysterious bat-creature, you know, and ultimately teaming up with him in a plot of some sort.” The writer/artist was gung-ho on the project, describing it as a “natural, great crossover, one of those synergistic, perfect combinations of characters.”

In many ways, Chaykin is the perfect creator to tackle a Batman/Indiana Jones team-up. As a writer, his expertise in the pulp adventures and old movie serials that inspired Indiana Jones in the first place is second-to-none, and as an artist, he excels at capturing the fashion and overall design of the time period. Further details like the 1939 setting are enticing, as Batman made his debut in our world in May of that year with the release of Detective Comics #27. There’s always an element of Batman that works best in that milieu, and pairing the Dark Knight with Dr. Henry Jones, Jr. in that setting would have made for a fun series. Seeing Indy interact with Batman’s rogues' gallery alone invites a host of interesting scenarios: Indy runs across a certain cat burglar stealing an artifact from a Gotham museum, or perhaps he stumbles upon one of Ra’s al Ghul’s Lazarus Pits in his travels. The possibilities are endless.

So why didn’t the crossover happen? Not even Chaykin knows for sure, saying, “It collapsed for a number of reasons, none of which I completely understand.” Given all the parties involved, it’s not surprising that a crossover of this magnitude would wind up sinking under the weight of its own expectations. And because Lucasfilm was later sold to Disney, it seems even more unlikely now that Batman and Indiana Jones will cross paths at any time in the near future, but fans can always dream.

Source: ScreenRant

(image via eBay)

#comics #Batman #Indiana Jones

7 notes · View notes