rs620
Lenin, at the turn of the century, wrote a book entitled Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. If one would read this little pamphlet one would see here that Mr. Lenin had precisely pointed out that all of the world had already been conquered and divided by colonial powers. There was nowhere else in the world left to be conquered and divided by colonial powers. This is the time when Zionism comes to rise. Zionism comes to look for a state when everywhere else in the world had already been dominated. Thus in order for Mr. Herzl to get a country for Zionists what he did was attach himself to imperialism. British imperialism in this case quite specifically. Of course as an African who suffered under the heels of British imperialism, I can have no love for it and certainly I cannot love anyone who attaches themselves to it for the foundation of a state and then call this a “liberation movement”. Liberation movements fight against imperialism – not with it! The legal foundation of the state of Israel is what is known as the Balfour Declaration. This declaration was issued in 1917. A man in the government of Britain named Balfour wrote a paper and promised the Jews a national home. The national home he promised them was an area which Britain was colonizing – Palestine. Palestine did not belong to the British just like Ireland doesn’t belong to the British even though they have troops there. But here these British imperialists signed a note and gave it to the Zionists and they accepted it. Where is the mortality in this? If you say that Israel belongs to you then you do not go to British thieves to get it, you go and take it. Once you go to an immoral being such as British imperialism and this becomes the basis for you getting the land, then clearly those who are true liberation fighters must question this […] Zionism is certainly not a liberation movement because it never fought against any imperialism as a matter of fact today Zionism is the baby child and infant protector of imperialism in the Middle East. It carries out the interests of American imperialism. If our tax dollars would stop being given to Israel, the state would sink tomorrow. And certainly no one can deny that American imperialism is the leading imperialist force in the world. So we cannot see how a “liberation movement” is so tied string and ham to American imperialism.
Kwame Ture, formerly known as Stokely Carmichael, in a lecture on Zionism, White Supremacy, and Imperialism (via rs620)
femme-de-lettres
femme-de-lettres:

Large (Wikimedia)
Most of Harry Wilson Watrous’ paintings feature elegantly dressed women engaging in banal activities against pastel, abstracted backgrounds. He presages Edward Hopper’s simplified forms and urban modernity, but with none of the isolating tension.
The titles, though, generally invite considerably more interesting—and sometimes even surreal—interpretations.
These perception-shifts range from the mild—a woman in elegant and slightly iridescent black sits rather uninspiringly in a cafe until her poetry-inpired title, A Cup of Tea, a Cigarette, and She, implies a third party—to the bizarre—a woman holding a tiny figurine of an 18th-century gentleman doffing his hat is somewhat unnervingly entitled The Suitors.

Sometimes Watrous’ choice casts intriguing doubt on an already-provocative piece: this family, an interracial couple and their daughter, caused enough of a stir at the National Academy of Design by the subject alone.
The title, though—The Drop Sinister—immediately raises a few more questions. Around 1913, when this was painted, a Constitutional Amendment was being proposed to ban interracial marriage on a principle called the “one-drop rule”: any African American ancestor at all, and a person would be considered black for the purposes of marriage. So perhaps that’s the answer—they worry for the marriageability of their daughter (and perhaps for the future legality of their own marriage). Certainly it’s an answer that would have occurred to Watrous’ audience.
The phrasing is a little odd, though. In casual speech, “a sinister drop” would sound more natural than. And it does seem slightly strange that two people with fairly dark hair have produced such a strikingly blond child. Not to mention that the nervous tension in the woman’s arm—and gaze—seems more focused on her husband than on her child. (But then, the bar sinister is a heraldic symbol indicating illegitimate birth.)
Now, I don’t have nearly so involved a tale to tell you about the 1915 painting this post ostensibly centers on. But I can tell you its suspiciously unassuming title: Just a Couple of Girls.

femme-de-lettres:

Large (Wikimedia)

Most of Harry Wilson Watrous’ paintings feature elegantly dressed women engaging in banal activities against pastel, abstracted backgrounds. He presages Edward Hopper’s simplified forms and urban modernity, but with none of the isolating tension.

The titles, though, generally invite considerably more interesting—and sometimes even surreal—interpretations.

These perception-shifts range from the mild—a woman in elegant and slightly iridescent black sits rather uninspiringly in a cafe until her poetry-inpired title, A Cup of Tea, a Cigarette, and She, implies a third party—to the bizarre—a woman holding a tiny figurine of an 18th-century gentleman doffing his hat is somewhat unnervingly entitled The Suitors.

The Drop Sinister

Sometimes Watrous’ choice casts intriguing doubt on an already-provocative piece: this family, an interracial couple and their daughter, caused enough of a stir at the National Academy of Design by the subject alone.

The title, though—The Drop Sinister—immediately raises a few more questions. Around 1913, when this was painted, a Constitutional Amendment was being proposed to ban interracial marriage on a principle called the “one-drop rule”: any African American ancestor at all, and a person would be considered black for the purposes of marriage. So perhaps that’s the answer—they worry for the marriageability of their daughter (and perhaps for the future legality of their own marriage). Certainly it’s an answer that would have occurred to Watrous’ audience.

The phrasing is a little odd, though. In casual speech, “a sinister drop” would sound more natural than. And it does seem slightly strange that two people with fairly dark hair have produced such a strikingly blond child. Not to mention that the nervous tension in the woman’s arm—and gaze—seems more focused on her husband than on her child. (But then, the bar sinister is a heraldic symbol indicating illegitimate birth.)

Now, I don’t have nearly so involved a tale to tell you about the 1915 painting this post ostensibly centers on. But I can tell you its suspiciously unassuming title: Just a Couple of Girls.