Let them eat cake.

 ‘Catch 22’, a situation where the desirable outcome is impossible, no matter what decisions you make. Queen of debt, Madame deficit, the great spender, are all titles associated with the French Queen Marie Antoinette. In the 2006 film ‘Marie Antoinette’ by Sofia Coppola, we do not follow a corrupt queen who drains France’s economy- we follow a scared young girl who is a glorified object- put on display for all to see. We follow her in her pain, her ridicule and her fall from grace. Trapped in a lavish prison of the palace of Versailles, surrounded by people who are waiting idly for her downfall.  Coppola uses various film aspects, such as costume, lighting, setting and sound to create a personalised recount of the events within the famous queen’s life, a recount which fits neatly into Coppola’s  personal filming style. A golden cage is a cage nonetheless. 

Almost everyone has felt an inescapable sense of nothingness at some stage, and one of the most common ways to cope is to try and fill the void with external comforts. Drugs, alcohol, food, spending are all common coping mechanisms which people use to comfort themselves. Marie Antoinette is no exception. The  ‘I Want Candy’ scene starts off with a wide shot of Marie crying in a dark corner, consumed by the grey shadows of the lightless room. This lack of light gives the viewer a sense of hopelessness and claustrophobia, as the shadows appear to consume her. The scene then cuts to a dolly shot of ornately decorated shoes, sitting on an equally beautifully decorated shelf as Bow Wow Wow’s ‘I Want Candy’ starts playing as a non-diegetic sound. A montage of material goods ensue, along with clips of Marie gambling and shopping with her ladies in waiting. Colour and setting are used  to juxtapose Marie’s inner feelings to her coping mechanisms. The scene starts off as dark and unsaturated, later cutting to a pastel coloured montage of crowded sets, champagne pouring and plates upon plates of decadent pastries. Montage clips of a jewelled choker on a pug and a dramatic tilt shot of Marie in an intricate, large hair piece, coupled with her dialogue “its not too much, is it?” use comedy to portray the ridiculously lavish spending of the French aristocrats in that era. 

In the context of when the film was released, in 2006, it's impossible to not notice the similarities in Coppala’s portrayal of Antoinette and the young female celebrities who were incredibly popular at the time. Much like icons such as Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, the public scrutinises Marie’s every move, holding her up to impossible standards. While she is expected to behave like the French Royal court, spending and enjoying the fineries available to her, she is also condemned by the public for partaking in overspending and eventually blamed for draining France’s economy. Furthermore, the depictions of Marie within the film, along with the initial criticisms of the film, raise another question;Why is it so wrong to like things that are marketed towards young women? Our interests have been at the bottom of the social hierarchy for decades (eg. Barbie, an extremely popular children’s toy which has been used as an insult against young women). Since when has the colour pink, or jewellery been associated with incompetant female behaviours? ‘Marie Antoinette’ is a film which is very obviously marketed towards a demographic of young women, as made clear by its sympathetic portrayal of a young woman navigating a new world, along with the pastel colour palette and romantic comedy elements. In this sense, even well after the film’s release, ‘Marie Antoinette’ still criticises our society's tendency to condemn young women regardless of their decisions.

“Where such men love they have no desire and where they desire they cannot love." -Sigmund Freud. The ‘Madonna and the Whore’ complex was coined by Sigmund Freud in the early 1900’s, and suggests that women who men desire can not be respected, and those who are respected can not be desired. Even the Queen of France, Marie Antoinette, is not immune to this complex. For the first six years of her marriage, she was unable to produce an heir, through no fault of her own. In the scene where Marie reads a letter from her mother, it is made painfully clear that she is blamed for an unfruitful marriage . The lighting of the scene is dark, with a small stream of natural light coming in through an adjacent window, which symbolises the overall despair and hopelessness of Marie’s situation. The intricate floral wallpaper vaguely resembles the pattern on Marie’s gown, visually crowding her and creating a claustrophobic and overwhelming feeling within the frame. The camera tilts as Marie slowly slides down the wall and onto the floor, creating a high angle which shows her as vulnerable. The dialogue of Marie’s mother reading the letter goes as follows;  “My dearest Marie, I am pleased to tell you how well your brothers and sisters are doing in their marriages” “all this news should fill me with contentment but is diminished by your dangerous situation” followed with the final suggestion “Everything depends on the wife, if she is willing and sweet”. The letter from her mother represents exactly what the noble aristocrats around Marie are thinking: it is Marie’s fault she has not produced an heir. Antoinette, through no fault of her own, is labelled as a ‘prude’ and a ‘failure’ for not yet having a child, when it is actually her husband who isn’t consummating the marriage. He see’s Marie as an innocent and virginal woman whom he respects, rather than somebody whom he desires. Despite his ‘love’ for his ‘madonna wife’, King Louis XVI is actually doing more harm than good. Without an heir, Marie’s position at Versailles is painfully temporary, for she is just an exotic object who was brought in and just as easily taken out of the palace. Despite this film taking place in the 18th century, society’s treatment of women hasn’t evolved an awful lot. Women in highly public roles (such as film stars, musicians ect) are easily denied and swapped out for others, often by their much older male managers. Women in public roles have always been subject to objectification, invasive public eyes and unstable positions. Society’s harsh criticism of public female figures hasn’t changed since the 18th century and is not likely to change in the foreseeable future.

Escapism;the tendency to seek distraction and relief from unpleasant realities, especially by seeking entertainment or engaging in fantasy. In Marie’s unpleasant reality, she craves relief from the glaring eyes of the noble people of Versalies, from the hatred of the public. After having her first child, Marie Therese, Antoinette was given the ‘Petit Trianon’- a lovely country themed sanctuary away from the rest of the palace. Marie’s escapism fits neatly into Sofia Coppola's unique film style, having the scene feature her signature motifs, such as natural light and low contrast within the scene. The ‘petit trianon’ scene mainly features close ups of Marie and her daughter, with no non-diegetic sound and very low contrast within the scene. The primary sounds are farm animals, a stream of water slowly trickling against the stone barriers and a gentle breeze sweeping through the long, dry plant life. The set contains very little additional props within the scene, juxtaposing the maximalism mise en scene of the earlier ‘I want candy’ scene, as mentioned previously. The lens flares and foggy lighting give the scene a ‘dream scape’ feel, which compliments the escapism aspect of Marie’s love for her little sanctuary.  Everything about the Petit Trianon contrasts the ‘grotesquely lavish’ palace of Versailles, from the more natural colour scheme to the entire lack of non-diegetic sound, juxtaposed against the 1980’s punk anthems (such as Hong Kong Garden, by Sioxsie and the Banshees) played in other scenes. Marie’s costume also contributes to the complete juxtaposition between the ‘Petit Trianon’ and the Palace of Versailles. The scenes where she is in the palace, Marie is adorned with bright pastel fabrics, lavish gold jewellery and outrageously elaborate silhouettes which were fashionable in the 18th century. Compared with the costumes of her scene in the Petit Trianon, where she wears loose, white chemise-style gowns, it is obvious that award winning costume designer-Milena Canonero- wanted to create an undeniable contrast between the visual depiction of the role of Queen which Marie plays and Marie’s actual desires. The scene also pays homage to Coppala’s earlier films, such as ‘The virgin suicides’ where similar style choices and lighting were used, along with the escapist tone. Much like her drug use and excessive partying, Marie uses the Petit Trianon as a form of escapism, a feeling we can all relate to. This directly links to the overall sympathetic tone of the film, where the escapism fantasy truly paints Antionette as how Coppala wished to present her, as a scared young woman in an unfavourably difficult situation. A situation we all would rather not find ourselves in. Despite the centuries of disgrace and blame which has been cast upon her legacy, Sofia Coppola still decides to represent her in a sympathetic view, as a young girl who is out of her depth. This film helped the general audience to critique and second guess their pre-existing negative views of The French Queen, and helped us to apply the same thought process before we harshly judge others. In the age of social media, judgement and criticism of our peers is inescapable. Despite ‘Marie Antoinettes’ debut in 2006 being an initial flop, the more broadcasted our society becomes, the more relevant its messages become. ‘Marie Antoinette’ will forever be known as a cult classic film for young women all across the world.

‘Marie Antoinette’, directed by Sofia Coppola in 2006, is a modern and sympathetic retelling of the inner life of the infamous Queen of France, Marie Antoinette. Through the use of film aspects such as costume, dialogue, lighting and mise en scene- Coppola creates an intimate film about the struggles and fall from grace of a young queen in an unfavourably cruel world. Rather than being a historically accurate depiction of the politics prior to the French revolution, the narrative follows the inner life of Marie during her life in Versailles, presenting a relatable character rather than a corrupt historical figure. 

Who (and what) are the Croods?

 In the 2013 film 'the Croods' we follow a caveman family who navigate a changing climate (and impending doom). Instead of analysing the actual movie, i'm gonna be a bio weirdo and decide which species the Croods are. so, let us begin....

So, we have a bipedal family (walk around on two legs) throughout the movie. Sandy (the very small child) walks quadrupedal, though this could be due to her being a toddler (a very murderous one at that). They have relatively small teeth and jaws, with a small fore head but also a small degree of prognathism. Using this facial structure, we can eliminate the Australopithecus genus.

Their clothing is reletively complex, being form fitting and made of different materials, likely using some form of sewing. Eep also wears a necklace, suggesting their are capable of more complex thought, potentially with the necklace having a symbolic meaning. They use very basic tools, but not fire, suggesting that they are part of the Oldowan tool structure. When it comes to their hunting tactics, they use communication but not a large amount of tools, also fitting in with the Oldowan tool culture. Their shelter is a natural cave, rather than a free standing hand made shelter, suggesting that they are from the early homo genus. They are shown to eat foods such as raw eggs and meat, which is high (but would be higher if they were cooked) in energy, compared to fibrous plants.

Using this information, I would predict that they are either late Homo Erectus or early Homo Heidelbergensis (hypothesised to be the predecessor to Homo Neanderthals). Both these species are primarily bipedal, have smaller foreheads and use early stone tool culture. How ever, with the Croods, there are a few weird features. They are shown to have complex thought such as grief when Grug is left behind and they mourn his death by blowing their shell horns. They also have very advanced clothing, which could possibly just be a design choice, but where is the fun in that? These features fit better with the Neanderthal genus, so they are a weird species. They also use art (shown by Grugs story telling) which makes this a little more complicated to get a definitive species.

In conclusion, I believe that the Croods family are members of the late Homo Erectus/ early Homo Heidelbergenis species, as shown by both their biological and cultural evolution demonstrated within the film.

In the initial narration, Eep suggested they are neanderthals, but I don't really care. Its a movie anyways.

Not just the power house of the cell.

Biology: Mitochondrial DNA

 In 1987, a group of scientists published a paper about mitochondrial DNA and the common mitochondrial ancestor that humans all over the world share. Mitochondrial DNA is different from nuclear dna and is only inherited maternally (from mothers, because sperm cells do not contain mitochondria). The DNA stays relatively unchanged throughout generations and the only source of variation is mutation (which occurs at a slow and steady rate). Human mitochondrial DNA codes for around 37 genes (compared to nuclear DNA which codes for around 30,000 genes). The mitochondrial DNA that the scientists tested was from all over the world and can all be traced back to a singular woman who lived (probably in Africa) around 170,000 years ago. This woman is nicknamed “mitochondrial Eve”. The average differences in the mitochondrial dna of the participants of the study was 9.5. The DNA difference within a group (eg. just in Europe) is higher than the difference between groups (eg. between Europe and Asia). It was also found that Africa had the highest number of mutations (probably because that is where the lineage started) and Australia had the lowest number of mutations (because humans immigrated there relatively recently). They claimed in their conclusion that a larger sample size would have given a more definitive answer about the lineage of mtDNA.

That awkward moment when your fossil gets found in a cave.

 In level three biology, we have been learning about human evolution. As a fun add on, we have learnt about a random species found in a cave system in south Africa. This species is an interesting thing, where it contains both human like features and ape like features. Another annoying challenge is the lack of surrounding rock and other substance, that makes working the age of this species a bit difficult. 

Homo Naledi

Australian museum (2019)

https://australian.museum/learn/science/human-evolution/homo-naledi/

Whilst on a cave expedition in 2013, two cavers found themselves in an unexplored part of the ‘rising star’ caving system (in south Africa). In this unexplored chamber, there were many human like fossils. This was a huge scientific discovery. The call went out for more cavers (who were small enough to fit through a narrow part of the cave. The 6 most qualified people who were chosen to collect the fossils were all young women. ‘Naledi’ comes from the word for ‘star’ in the local Sotho language. The strange thing about Homo Naledi is the combination of advanced human like features (shape of skull, hand structure, foot structure and the bottom half of the pelvis) along with earlier features (small stature, small cranial capacity, robust collar bones and arm bones which suggest climbing). The remains were also found in a cave, but there is no evidence that they were dragged down by predators. It is also very unlikely that the amount of homo naledi found in the caves just got lost and died. It is more likely that they were buried, in a ritualistic manner. This would suggest the potential of abstract thought and rituals within the species. Then again, its not like we can go back and ask them :)

Art board update (wow, look at me go)

 So, panel two is nearly done, which is pretty snazzy. Quick recap: my theme is unattainable perfection and the obsession over being perfect. A truely heartwarming idea. My artist models include Artemisia Gentilschi, Frida Kahlo and Faith ringold. 

The last series (because order isn't relevent in my blog posts):

Art series 8 is supposed to sum up all of board two. Board two focuses on the grotesque side of perfectionism, while still being aesthetically pleasing. The women's faces are painted in watercolour (a delicate and 'feminine' medium) whilst there are flowers bursting out of their skulls. Blood is dripping down their faces.

I couldn't get them to rotate. So the overall visual feel of these paintings is "if a water colour palette could throw up on a piece of paper", which is exactly what I wanted. There is a grungy feel which represents the messiness of perfectionism (how it can make your life a mess). There is also gold leaf to link with the gold boarders of the first board. My artist model for this series was Frida Kahlo. Her paintings are often close up portraits. They also seem to use flowers as a motif a fair bid, along with gruesome imagery (like the one where her heart is cut out). I Incorporated these motifs whilst not translating the media (I used water colour, she used oil paint). 

Art series something (the top one of the second board, I have lost count):

I didn't really have a plan for this series (I know, shocking, considering that everything is planned out to scale) as I started the first one at 2.30 am on a fateful Sunday morning. The next thought was obviously "great, now lets make it look kinda scary". The gold boarder and stitching are both elements which I used in the first board. These paintings now have gold leaf on the white swirls, I just don't have a photo.

This series is in the same style as art series 8 (because I started it in lock down and only had watercolours at the time). Same style features as well. We have some figures in the middle of the painting, dark purple backgrounds, flowers and stitching (with white embroidery thread). Once again, I have used the juxtaposition of beauty (flowers, colours ect) and gruesomeness (because having eyeballs is for suckers).

Its fair to say that I am pretty darn happy with this series. I am really proud of how they turned out and for experimenting with watercolour (I used to find it really annoying because its so easy to mess up).

Art series 'the other one':

I know, creative naming. This series is inspired by botanical charts. Other than the flower motif within my boards, the only real reason why I decided on a botanical chart style is because I think they are really cool. Of course, I needed to make this series depressing, so I added some lovely labels which represent the cycle of perfectionism. I also used the same dripping effect as the other two series, because I CAN. 

Purple flowers, because this is one of my board's main colours. They also have white stitching to tie in with the Faith Ringold emulation series (first board) and the 'girls without eyeballs' series. 

That brings us to the grand finale... The finished board:

I don't know how to get them to be side by side. I guess this year I wont be spending all of study leave in the art room (because that ended REAAAAALLY well last year). Chances are I will do a few touch ups before the end of the year, but I am really happy with myself.

Level two art: term three update.

As of today, which is the second of September, my first art board is completed. Yay.

Ok, so the theme of my board is unattainable perfection and how we tear ourselves apart in the effort of achieving something impossible. This could be anything, from grades to our appearances. Especially in this day and age, it is so easy to get caught up trying to be perfect. From the social media influencers with 'perfect bodies' via Photoshop to some of our peers, who somehow manage to get 100% on everything; its becoming increasingly hard to be happy with ourselves. This unhappiness can lead us to become obsessed with our flaws and try to change them. We try to change what makes us human.

Fair to say, its a viscous cycle.

So, I've planned out all my series, to scale on this page. Little bit nerdy but that's ok. 

Art series one:

Art series one featured roses painted using the principals of positive and negative space. These roses were bordered by vintage mirror/ frames.

The original plan was to have charcoal sketches of mirrors as my series, reminiscent of the style of Kath Kolwitz. After doing the positive/negative space exercise in class, I decided that a rose in that style would be very beautiful and a little bit Gothic, which are both features I wanted to include in my board.

The series ended up looking like this. The roses symbolises beauty, which is one of the many unattainable things we strive for. The wilted rose, while still beautiful, is dying. I thought the dying rose would be an ideal representation of when we take the obsession of beauty too far.

Art series two:

To go with my already depressing theme, we have a lovely series of some woman getting consumed by vines. As ya do. The woman is supposed to be Aphrodite, the goddess of love and beauty. Beauty is one of those things that we are pressured to have and can quickly grow out of control (like untamed vines, see what I did there?). I used the purple flowers to represent the beauty in this obsession (not how it hurts people, but how it starts off as an improvement then backfires). This obsession gradually grows and over takes the image, represented by the vines having more space in the second painting.

Art series three:

Art series three is an emulation of the African American painter/ quilter Faith Ringold. Faith uses quilting and painting to convey various stories and people. Quilting is one of the major ways stories were passed down from generations in some African cultures are used by Ringgold to create her politically charged artworks. I used geometric shadows/ shapes and stitching to represent her art style.

Art series four:

Ignore the title on the planning page, I swapped some series around. Art series 4 acts as a summary of the first board. The images are of two women in different phases of being consumed by flowers. Thats not gruesome at all. 

they are framed with gold boarders, which links back to my first paintings. Wow, its almost like motifs are useful for ncea art, who knew.

Please excuse the blurry-ness, my phone is a bit odd. The contrast between the dark background and the drastic highlights of the figures represents Artemisia Gentilschi's style, who is one of my artist models. Overall, I am pretty happy with board one.

                   :)

Should I steal the bike?

 Another English lesson, another existential crisis. Today I have been learning about Immanuel Kant and his concept of categorical imperatives. Kant is interested in morals and in his opinion, morals aren't connected to religion, they are connected to us as people.

This ties in with our exploration of the concept of self because morals make up the unique reasoning why we do the things we do.

There are two categorical imperatives which Kant uses to summarise how we as humans have morals.

1. “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”. A maxim is the action that you are thinking about taking. For example, I could be thinking about stealing somebody's bike. By this moral logic, I can only steal this bike if I think everyone should always be allowed to steal. Obviously thats a dumb idea, because that would just cycle around and around, so by Kants logic, I should not steal that bike. 

2. “So act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in another, always as an end and never as only a means.” This means it is wrong to use other humans for the sole purpose of your own benefit. Obviously we use things as a mean all the time, such as the computer your are reading this on, or the bike I definitely didn't steal in order to get around, but it is morally wrong to use a person and only treat them as a way to get what you want. We use people all the time too, such as teachers to pass on knowledge, or chefs to make food for restaurants, but we still acknowledge their humanity and know there is more to them than that singular purpose. 

These two ideas come together to form the idea that we treat others as human and don't do to them what we wouldn't want them doing to us. 

Ps. No bikes were stolen in the making of this blog post.