Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Tutankhamun's face

You could not find a better example of the differences between the French and American aesthetic than the reconstruction of Tutankhamum's face. The French reconstruction shows a delicately-featured young man, almost feminine and innocent, until you see the sneer of cold command. Compare that to the Americans' creation: the head of a thug.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey guess what, your an idiot. you act like the french made an elegant, beautiful face, while the american version was shit. if you actually took the time to read the article, you would realize that the americans didn't know who they were recreating, so they didn't add any artistic touches to the model. also, the article says the faces were extremely close in structure, so by insulting the american model you are insulting the french model as well. dumbass.

5:01 PM  
Blogger Stomaphagus said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11:11 PM  
Blogger Stomaphagus said...

Hi, blogless one.

Sorry, I caught some typos in my original post. Think I caught 'em all.

I think you didn't take the time to understand my post before writing (it wasn't a big point; it wouldn't have taken long). I did not actually say that the American version was shit. If I thought so, I would have. I said that the differences in the models expressed a difference, as I see it, in the aesthetic priorities of French and American people. And yeah, I said the American model looks like a thug. Because it does! Dude, look at it! And yes, for those reasons I like the French one better. Who knows, if they had shown the Egyptian team's mockup, maybe I'd like that one.

Yes, as the article said, the structures of the faces were nearly the same, as they would have to be. Uh, they used the same skull. Yet the two faces shown in the article, as a whole, are not the same. Look, you see the same differences in French and American leading men in movies, too. The French version has a different expression, and is, in general, lighter in weight. The American one looks big, square-jawed, and tough. Would you like to cheat this guy at pool, or meet him in a dark alley?

Now, you could also make the case from my post that the French are a weak, craven, cheese-eating effeminate race, yet I didn't say that either.

In any case the reconstruction artists knew the morphological heritage of the skull in question - that is, they knew that the skull was that of an North African man (as they mentioned, in the article), perhaps post-adolescent, if barely. Don't know much about archeology, eh? The personal identity was held from them, but not the actual evidence of the skull. That they could see, as they are trained to do, since skeletal remains often do not come with identification. That's why all three models look right.

The only thing the Americans would not know to add is the hierarchy-marking eye makeup. But I didn't mention the eye makeup, the added skin tone, the fake eyes, the "artistic touches" you are talking about. I was talking about the face, as a whole.

C'mon, don't be so damn sensitive! Seriously, is your patriotism that fragile? You're flaming me over an opinion about King Tut's face? Are you going to jump up my ass if I claim that the Kalashnikov design is more tolerant of poor maintenance than Eugene Stoner's M-16?

If you had a blog, I would know. This, this is like talking to a wall.

11:26 PM  
Anonymous Smoke said...

Drugs are just bad, you should try to use Herbal Alternatives as a temporary replacement to loose the dependance!

9:49 PM  
Anonymous Guitar Master said...

I wish I could blog as good as you, but what I can do is give you a nice Guitar Lesson!

4:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NSU - 4efer, 5210 - rulez

6:36 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home