This, That, and Everything In-Between

The idea is, when we count down and change slides, kids have to mimic one thing in the painting as best they can, whether it’s animate or inanimate. If there’s nothing in the shot for them to mimic (because I threw some contemporary abstract stuff in), they have to show me how the painting makes them feel. Easy enough, gets them excited to move around and vocal about their feelings regarding art, it’s very chaotic. I can tell pretty fast who’s got the emotional maturity to mimic things in a complex way, and who’s just enough of an abstract thinker to mimic inanimate objects early on in the game...

So the first picture is this:

Napoleon Crossing the Alps. My favorite reactions are usually the kids who pretend to be the freaked-out horse, but 2 memorable occasions were the one where a student immediately scrunched up to be the rock in the foreground, and the one where a pair of girls, without any communication on their parts, decided to be Napoleon riding the horse with one as Napoleon and one as the horse. Basically one of them fully tackled the other apropos of nothing, it was hilarious

In case you’ve forgotten, this is Persistence:

And I swear every time, there’s a beat right before everyone either becomes a tree by t-posing for their life, or goes boneless like some kind of child-shaped pancake over the nearest flat surface

In case you haven’t looked at it recently, this is The Scream:

My favorite guesses from the kids to Why Is He Screaming:

-those guys behind him are going to arrest him

-he missed his boat and it’s one of the ones in the background, he just noticed

-the sky’s all wiggly

-he just wanted to scream

-HE CAN SEE THE CLASS OF FIRST GRADERS LOOKING AT HIM AND HE DOESN’T LIKE IT

There’s a theory that early Europeans started saying “brown one” or “honey-eater” instead of “bear” to avoid summoning them, and similarly my friend has started calling Alexa “the faceless woman” because saying her true name awakens her from her slumber

English has an avoidance register used in the presence of certain respected animals, which sounds fancy until you realize it’s spelling out w-a-l-k and t-r-e-a-t in front of the dog.

All evil whales are, well, evil. So evil that if you speak their name at sea, they will hear it and home in on you. So instead you use all sorts of euphemisms for their names. Also if you try to cook their meat it literally disappears from the pot. That’s right, they’re so evil, you can’t even eat them.

They include such types as the hrosshvalur (horsewhale), with big eyes and a red mane and tail. This is probably the best known and most feared of the lot.

The raudkembingur (redcomb) is especially cruel and bloodthirsty even by illhveli standards. If you manage to escape it, it will die of frustration.

Good luck escaping the mushveli (mousewhale) though, it has legs! And will clamber onto the beach in pursuit!

Or what about death from above? The stökkull (jumper) leaps high into the air and pile-drives boats to pieces.

Meanwhile the skeljungur (shellwhale) sits in the path of boats and lets them get wrecked on its shelly hide…

… while the sverdhvalur (swordwhale) slices through boats with its dorsal fin.

The katthveli (catwhale) is relatively harmless though. It meows.

The same can’t be said of the lyngbakur (heatherback), a classic island fish that lets sailors get on its back and then dives, taking them to a watery grave.

The nauthveli (oxwhale) on the other hand specially targets cattle, attracting them into the sea with its bellow before tearing them apart.

How can you avoid all these murderous whales, like the taumafiskur (bridlefish) here? Any of a number of ways, including getting a steypireydur to help. There are substances, ranging from angelica to sheep dung and chopped fox testicles, that they find abhorrent. And you can distract them with loud noises and barrels.

For more, I assure you this link will answer all your questions.

https://abookofcreatures.com/category/illhveli/

at this settlement 20-30,000 years ago there lived a person who appears to have been a sort of sorcerer-grandmother-ceramics artist and her workshop was preserved very well in the sedimentary layers. her hut where she had her kilns was full of little sculptures of animals and people that seem to have been made to explode in the kiln on purpose, we're not sure why but nevermind. the relevant detail is that when you sculpt something with your hands and then fire it, your fingerprints can be preserved in the surface of the clay forever, so we have fingerprints of ancient ceramics artists that have survived for tens of thousands of years. and one of the major artifacts from Dolni Vestonice has a fingerprint on it that is so small it could only have belonged to a child

if you thought you were signing up for a partnership of equals where you shared the responsibilities and financial burdens, the other person does not have the right to pressure or manipulate you into becoming The Breadwinner.

like, in my case it was super duper obvious that what my ex was doing was wrong because they would watch me come home from 50+ hours of work every week while they did three, and then expect me to do all the grocery shopping, cleaning, and life admin shit as well.

but even if they hadn't. even if they had decided to be The Housewife while I was The Breadwinner. that would still be bullshit because when we got married it was based on explicit agreement that we were planning to be a two-income, split-everything-equitably couple. no matter what, I didn't consent to burning myself out trying to provide for two people, and no one had the right to force me to do that.

it's not just bad if you happen to marry an asshole. it's bad because (mostly) women are pressured by society to make themselves (and possibly their children) completely financially dependent on a man who has been taught from early on that he has to make the decisions for the family because he is the rational one while women (and children) are too emotional to make smart choices. and then the woman can't leave without risking to put her children into poverty. (yes, there are laws to protect women but they do not always work well enough)

The Breadwinner is typically gendered as a male role and I think men are more easily manipulated into taking it on. because the societal pressure is already there, and there are specific gendered social scripts that abusers can rely on - women wanting their husbands to be "ambitious" is a whole trope for example.

and yeah, once you're in that situation, a lot of the being trapped is mental like you say - "it would be wrong to leave this person who depends on me" type stuff - but some of it is structural and very hard to escape. my personal example: in Scotland, it's hard to get a divorce without being separated for at least a year first. and, if you own a house, your spouse has the legal right to live there, even if their name isn't on the deed and they aren't paying the mortgage. that's a huge catch-22: can't get your spouse out of your home without a divorce, can't get a divorce while your spouse is still in your home. the person wanting the divorce could move out, of course, but with what money? that trap kept me in an unsafe situation for years.

and there is real danger in the role itself. financial danger where the other person drags you into debt and your housing and food become precarious, but also danger of illness or even death from overwork. there are plenty of jobs where being chronically tired at work can literally kill you (eg long haul trucking) but even where it's not quite so direct, the danger to health is very real.

one big difference is history. The Housewife has always been a dangerous position to occupy; The Breadwinner was much, much safer even just 60 years ago, when it was normal for a single income to be able to support a family without constant overtime or gig economy side hustles.