anotherdayforchaosfay:jamiebythesea:tirelipimpesque: vinceaddams:marzipanandminutiae:vinceaddams:eng
anotherdayforchaosfay:jamiebythesea:tirelipimpesque: vinceaddams:marzipanandminutiae:vinceaddams:english-history-trip:hasufin:nonasuch:jkthinkythoughts:fashionsfromhistory:Snuffboxc.1740FranceMFA Boston I have never in my life seen an objet d'art that qualified for the Tiffany Paradox, but here we are. It looks like it fell off a middle school girls bedroom desk circa 1987. I love this.also I went and looked it up on the MFA website and as I suspected, it’s made of mother-of-pearl! the rainbow parts are probably from iridescent blacklip shells, and the rest is carved white oyster shell. There are some Chinese porcelains which are definitely worthy of the Tiffany paradox - I mean, sure, it was made in the 1300s but it’s a lemon yellow tea bowl - but honestly this one really epitomizes the matter. Hey, check out these funky Chico’s necklaces from my Jewish grandmother’s collection:SIKE they are 1400 YEARS OLD ooh, I’ve got some more! Look at this painting.A Caricature Group by John Hamilton Mortimer, c. 1766. This does not look like an 18th century oil painting, it looks more like something out of Mad magazine, but nope. 1760’s.I made a pinterest board for 18th century pottery just to save all the Weird Stuff to it, like this horrible bear jug, which is just one of many similarly horrible 18th century bear jugs! It’s hideous and I love it. Mugs shaped like people’s heads was also A Thing, here’s one from c. 1782.And I LOVE this teapot with fossil decoration c. 1760-65. It’s amazing. Perfect. I would so dearly love to have a replica and feature it prominently in a photoshoot with some of my 18th century costumes.This one is also c. 1760’s.And one more, also c. 1760!I love pretty historical dishes with delicate floral patterns as much as the next guy, but seeing weird and bright and tacky stuff from over 2 centuries ago makes me happy.Honourable mention to these c. 1788-93 stockings with little knitted portraits in between the brightly coloured stripes. I discovered, when investigating what 1840s pearl earrings looked like for a ball outfit, that they lookEXTREMELY 1980sseriously I was able to buy something from the Fancy Section of Claire’s that looked almost exactly like the top example I can’t believe I forgot to add the 1840’s 8-bit foxes!! This embroidered waistcoat is one of 3 I’ve seen with the same design, so it must have been published in a magazine or something. It’s so weird knowing that it’s 1840’s because it looks so pixel-y, especially with that bright blue background. (And yes, I’ve seen plenty of other pixel-y looking old needlepoint and and such, but they’re usually floral.)Also, wow, those do look very 1980’s! Very convenient for costumers when things repeat like that!There’s also a surprising amount of historical jewelry that looks exactly like something my middle school classmates would wear.Necklace, 1861-67, V&A.Ring, 1730-60, V&A.Ring, c. 1780, V&A.Turns out people have liked heart shaped jewelry for a very long time!…I’ll try not to reblog this a 3rd time when I inevitably think of even more stuff, because a post like this could go on forever. @jamiebythesea It’s funny that people picture Victorian fashion as dull an steampunkish in colour, when in reality, bright garish colours were super fashionable thanks to the invention on new dyes. @thebibliosphere -- source link