#Emery Reves

[denimbex1986]

'Blink and you’ll miss it.

In a scene in the new Oppenheimer film set right after the successful 1949 atomic bomb test by the USSR, there is a brief exchange between the film’s two main antagonists. Lewis Strauss, chair of the Atomic Energy Commission, asks J. Robert Oppenheimer what he thinks should be done now. “International control,” Oppenheimer immediately replies.

“You mean world government?” Strauss fires back.

It sounds like a throwaway line, or one of those accusations routinely hurled at those trying to make global institutions marginally more effective. But in this case, Chairman Strauss’ epithet was spot on.

The tremendous destruction of World War II, even before Hiroshima and Nagasaki, prompted a radical rethinking of the world political order. In particular, the idea of world government as the solution to the problem of war was placed front and center in this country’s foreign policy debate, and argued about passionately in diners, dorm rooms, and dinner parties all across the land. Unfortunately, however, the legions of moviegoers who buy tickets to Christopher Nolan’s otherwise excellent film this summer will have no idea that one of the leading proponents of that singular idea was J. Robert Oppenheimer.

After the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Oppenheimer threw himself into working to control nuclear weapons. Like other atomic scientists, he was fully aware that the Soviet Union would likely develop its own atom bombs in just a few years, and that time was short to prevent an unrestrained nuclear arms race. The movie refers to his activities as working for “international cooperation.” But his actual ideas were much deeper and more radical than those anodyne words imply.

In 1946, Oppenheimer participated in the development of a report for the secretary of state’s Committee on Atomic Energy about what might be done to control nuclear weapons. The report, which became known as the Acheson-Lilienthal Report but which was authored chiefly by Oppenheimer himself, proposed an international Atomic Development Agency that would have the sole right to mine and process uranium and to run reactors of any kind. This was a radical proposal, but, as its authors explained, they could see no alternative.

In June 1946, Oppenheimer published an article in The New York Times Magazine explaining the proposal to the public. The article discussed the relationship between peaceful and military uses of atomic energy, evaluated a couple of other ideas for controlling atomic weapons, and then discussed the proposed Atomic Development Agency.

It is here, in a section entitled “Sovereignty,” that we come across a striking passage:

“Many have said that without world government there could be no permanent peace, and without peace there would be atomic warfare. I think one must agree with this. Many have said that there could be no outlawry of weapons and no prevention of war unless international law could apply to the citizens of nations, as federal law does to citizens of states, or we have made manifest the fact that international control is not compatible with absolute national sovereignty. I think one must agree with this.”

Similarly, in a January 1948 article for Foreign Affairs magazine, Oppenheimer wrote:

“It is quite clear that in this field we would like to see patterns established which, if they were more generally extended, would constitute some of the most vital elements of a new international law: patterns not unrelated to the ideals which more generally and eloquently are expressed by the advocates of world government.”

From the vantage point of 2023, the remarkable thing about these passages is the apparent assumption that the reader is familiar with the idea of world government, and arguments for and against it, to the point where they can just be mentioned without explanation or elaboration. And for much of the public for much of the 1940s, this was probably true—as remarkable as it might seem to us today, when this notion is entirely absent from the international affairs debate.

Even before the end of the war, world government advocacy had become a prominent feature of the political conversation in America. In 1943, the businessman and Republican presidential candidate Wendell Willkie published a book called One World. The book sold 1.5 million copies in the four months following its release and played a key role in a blossoming of world federation advocacy—long before virtually anyone had heard of anything like an atomic bomb. To choose but one example, an organization known as the Student Federalists, founded in 1942 by a charismatic 16-year-old boy named Harris Wofford, over the next several years formed 367 chapters on high school and college campuses around the country. (Wofford went on to become a United States senator and a key civil rights aide in the White House of President John F. Kennedy.)

Then in 1945, just a few months before the Trinity test, came Emery Reves’ The Anatomy of Peace. While Willkie’s book was a travelogue describing his voyage around the world, Reves’ was an extended logical argument that only law could create peace and only a world federation—a union of nations with a government taking care of issues that could not be handled at the national level—could create meaningful law that applied to individuals rather than governments. Indeed, Oppenheimer’s passage above could have easily been a summary of Reves’ book.

It is worth noting that both of these books were published before the United Nations Charter was more than a draft. (It was eventually signed on June 26, 1945, less than a month before the Trinity test.) The activism they inspired attempted to make the UN something more than an agglomeration of sovereign states that could sign treaties with each other, but in the end were subject to no law worthy of the name. Sovereignty meant that no state could be compelled to do anything it didn’t want to, and treaties could only be enforced by sanctions or war, not through legal action against individuals. (Citizens and various organizations could also take the government to court if it is not properly carrying out its functions, as they can in the U.S.)

It wasn’t just books. Beloved children’s book author and New Yorker editor E. B. White devoted a great many of his editorials to the problem of global anarchy. (These were later collected and published in a book called The Wild Flag: Editorials From The New Yorker on Federal World Government and Other Matters.) Saturday Review editor Norman Cousins, upon reading about Hiroshima, wrote a lengthy editorial for his magazine titled “Modern Man is Obsolete,” that passionately argued for immediate democratic world federation. “There is no need to talk of the difficulties in the way of world government,” wrote Cousins. “There is need only to ask if we can afford to do without it.”

In a similar vein Walter Lippmann, a founder of both The New Republic magazine and the Council on Foreign Relations, and a key player later in the Cuban Missile Crisis, wrote in 1946: “There are few in any country who now believe that war can be regulated or outlawed by the ordinary treaties among sovereign states. … No one can prove what will be the legislative, executive, and judicial organs of the world state … but there are ideas that shake the world, such as the ideal of the union of mankind under universal law.”

Even General Hap Arnold, the only U.S. Air Force officer ever to hold the rank of five stars and founder of the RAND Corporation, said in 1946: “The greatest need facing the world today is for international control of the human forces that make for war.” The atom bomb, he declared, presents “a tremendous argument for a world organization that will eliminate conflict. … We must make an end to all wars for good.”

And before the end of the decade, more than 50,000 Americans had joined the United World Federalists (UWF)—led for three years by a bright young man named Alan Cranston, who went on to serve as a four-term U.S. Senator from California. UWF has continued its operations to this very day and is now known as Citizens for Global Solutions.

A number of physicists also came to support world federation. “Conflicts in interest between great powers can be expected to arise in the future … and there is no world authority in existence that can adjudicate the case and enforce the decision,” said Leo Szilard, who first conceived the nuclear chain reaction. But humanity had at its disposal, he insisted, “the solution of the problem of permanent peace. … The issue that we have to face is not whether we can create a world government … (but) whether we can have such a world government without going through a third world war.”

But the most prominent and most active proponent of world government among scientists was Albert Einstein himself. He had always opposed nationalism, and supporting world federation was a natural extension. Einstein wrote articles, gave interviews, and helped found the Emergency Committee of Atomic Scientists. The Student Federalists of Princeton, New Jersey, held meetings in his living room. And he served as the founding advisory board chair of the United World Federalists.

The type of world government that Einstein promoted would exclusively have power over security issues and a few internal circumstances that could lead to war. But this kind of limited world government was a must. “A new kind of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels,” he said. “Often in evolutionary processes a species must adapt to new conditions in order to survive. … In light of new knowledge … an eventual world state is not just desirable in the name of brotherhood; it is necessary for survival.”

Oppenheimer’s focus in the postwar years was more near-term. He worked for international control of nuclear matters—both weapons and civilian reactors that could be used to make weapons. But that international control was to take the form of an agency with a strict monopoly on such activities. His 1946 New York Times Magazine piece says about the plan: “It proposes that in the field of atomic energy there be set up a world government. That in this field there be renunciation of national sovereignty. That in this field there be no legal veto power. That in this field there be international law.”

Why would this be significant? In a lengthier article published in 1946 in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Oppenheimer wrote, “The problem that we are dealing with,” in seeking to prevent atomic war, “is the problem of the elimination of war.” Proposals for addressing nuclear issues were to be judged on whether they also advanced this goal. The article was titled “The Atom Bomb as a Great Force for Peace”—not because of the simplistic and banal argument that the bomb would make war too horrible to contemplate, but because its control would lay the foundation for a world government that truly could abolish war.

Even Edward Teller, accurately portrayed in the Oppenheimer film as pushing for the development of the immensely more destructive hydrogen bombs and eventually undercutting his colleague at the security hearings, appeared to embrace the idea! In 1948, he discussed the Preliminary Draft of a World Constitution, written by a committee of eminent scholars chaired by the chancellor of the University of Chicago, Robert Maynard Hutchins, and aimed at establishing a Federal Republic of the World. And Teller said about this enterprise: “[America’s] present necessary task of opposing Russia should not cause us to forget that in the long run we cannot win by working against something. Instead we must work for something. We must work for World Government.”

And in his 1948 Foreign Affairs article, again Oppenheimer maintained: “If the atomic bomb was to have meaning in the contemporary world, it would have to be in showing that not modern man, not navies, not ground forces, but war itself was obsolete.”

At the end of this essay, Oppenheimer returned to the noble aspirations that so many held in the shattering initial weeks after Trinity, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. “The aim of those who would work for the establishment of peace,” he insisted, “must be to maintain what was sound in the early hopes, and by all means in their power to look to their eventual realization. It is necessarily denied to us in these days to see at what time, to what immediate ends, in what context, and in what manner of world, we may return again to the great issues touched on by the international control of atomic energy. … (But) this is seed we take with us, traveling to a land we cannot see, to plant in new soil.”

Should we consider all this just a mere historical curiosity? Is anything about these conversations eight long decades ago relevant to the challenges of the 21st Century? As politically unlikely as it might now appear, might something like a genuine world republic provide humanity with the kinds of tools it will require to get a grip on existential perils like the climate emergency, runaway artificial intelligence, and who knows what kinds of new weapons of mass extermination that Oppenheimer’s heirs will almost surely invent in the decades and centuries to come?

The best possible answer to that is the same one purportedly given by China’s Premier Zhou Enlai in 1971, when asked by Henry Kissinger what he thought about the consequences of the French Revolution.

Mr. Zhou, the story goes, considered the question for a moment, and then replied: “I think it is too soon to tell.”'

#Oppenheimer #Lewis Strauss #Zhou Enlai #Atomic Energy Commission #Acheson-Lilienthal Report #Wendell Willkie #One World #Emery Reves #The Anatomy of Peace #Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists #Albert Einstein #Edward Teller #Henry Kissinger

[reveluving]

a little more love ; peter hale x reader x deucalion

summary: when two of the most fearsome werewolves do whatever they can to convince their beloved to cancel dinner night with the pups.

warnings: loads of kisses, hugs and but no s~mut. not yet, at least (still, minors DNI!), very cheesy ngl; peter & deuc just really love their vampire wifey <3

a/n: omg a debut?? s/o to @fanficimagery​; their Peter fics + others are the reasons why I wrote this—awakening another wild side of of mine to the point of no return (affectionately) 😭 I got another one in the making tho, trust! love y’all and don’t forget to leave some sugar! ᐠ( ᐛ )ᐟ

» fancy reading the series? check out the m.list!

'Though Deuc and Peter chimed in once in a while, the pack could tell they were giving you most of the spotlight.' ;

The sound of blackbirds chirping outside your window was enough to wake you up from your slumber. You stirred but could barely move with the arm around you and pulling you close. Their chest rose and fell at a pace so relaxing, so comforting, it could've lulled you back to sleep right away.

"Did you sleep well?" You shivered at the voice, deep and barely awake, forcing you to crack one eye open. You craned your neck, welcoming the very sight of the man holding you dearly. You hummed, eliciting a chuckle out of him as you nuzzled into him.

"You're so comfy." You murmured, the silky sheets against your skin would've been more than enough to chain you to bed for another hour or two.

Too bad you had other plans.

"Why didn't you wake me up?" You blinked, noticing the hues ranging from orange to pink coming from the window, an indication that sunset was nearing faster than you had anticipated.

"You looked so peaceful." Deuc responded casually as if you hadn't promised the pack dinner night, which was happening in two hours.

"I didn't even hear the alarm." You blindly took your phone on the nightstand, finding it impossible for you to sleep through one in the first place.

But, Deuc's sudden lack of response told you everything you needed to know.

So, you placed your phone away before turning to him.

"Deuc," He hummed, "Did you have anything to do with this?"

"No?"

"Deuc!"

He barely opened his eyes to look at you before huffing out a 'yes'.

"Can't we just order takeout?"

"Even they can do that from their own home," You grinned, poking his cheek, "And you know no one delivers to this side of the road past seven."

"Then we could always just order now and ask one of them to pick it up later," He was hell-bent on making you stay, the offer especially enticing when he pulled the covers over you with him, "Or better yet, ask him to pick it up and make himself useful for once."

You snorted, only to jump when fingers lightly traced your spine.

"Hey," You admonished lightly, "Behave."

"You can't expect a man to behave when he has such beauty in his arms." He slipped his hand under the blanket, "Come on, all you have to do is cancel it, and we'll make sure to take such good care of you."

You whined, squirming in his arms as though you were fighting your inner demons before sitting up, but not before covering your bare chest with the blanket.

"Nice try, handsome, but I’m not falling for your tricks." You pointed directly at his nose, only to sputter when he countered your sudden determination by nipping the tip of your index finger.

"Angel, you always do," Touché, "The pups can fend for themselves for another day, can't they?"

"Deuc," You sighed shaking your head in amusement; you could never get mad at him. You turned your head a little, kissing his palm before caressing his cheek with your free hand, "I haven't seen them for over a week, God knows whether or not they've taken care of themselves since. It's only for a couple of hours, I promise."

Deuc narrowed his eyes at you, trying not to give in to your puppy eyes.

But he knew better.

He let his head fall to the pillow, letting out a dramatic sigh.

"Alright, alright," You perked up, only to be caught off guard when he wrapped his arms around you. He pulled you down to him for a heated kiss, taking your breath away as his tongue lightly ran across the tip of your fangs. Your whimpers only motivated him to take back his own words and never let you leave the bed, but he loved you too much to say no.

He pulled away, satisfied with the way you looked back at him with wide eyes.

"You didn't think I'd expect some sort of return if I'm going to have to keep my hands to myself for a few hours?"

Puffing up your cheeks in embarrassment, you were barely able to maintain eye contact as intense as his before giving him a quick peck at the lips.

"Angel," He chuckled, "If that's the kind of payment you're planning to give, I'd expect at least a couple more."

"You're enjoying this, aren't you?"

"Very much," He responded nonchalantly as though he wasn't practically basking in your reactions, "In fact, I could wake up to this every day."

There was no point arguing with this man, not especially when you had dinner to whip up in under two hours. So, you took a deep breath, lowering yourself for a proper kiss. Deuc was eager, that much was clear as he chased after your lips, keeping you still with one hand on the back of your head.

He shivered as you lightly ran your nails down his chest, slowly pulling away before letting you rest your head on his shoulder.

"Much better."

It had taken Deuc exactly a good half an hour to get his fill of you before begrudgingly letting you go to take a shower, promising to help you out right after.

You, on the other hand, have been at it in the kitchen for an hour, seasoning your stroganoff before moving on with the dessert.

Just then, you froze, feeling a pair of eyes from the living room watching your every move. You slowly placed the bowl of unwhipped cream onto the counter, hoping to look as neutral as possible. The presence, however, had seen right through you, because as soon as you faced the entrance to the foyer, you felt their warm breath against your neck before they spun you around. You yelped, feeling yourself fall backwards despite their hands securely holding onto your hips.

Your hands shot up to their back, one around his neck and the other gripping the back of their shirt. Had it been anyone else, other than Deuc, you would've instinctively torn their throat out even before they could even put their hands on you.

But, this was Peter you were talking about.

"What's cookin', good lookin'?"

‘You've got to be kidding me.’

"Jesus, Hale," He was clearly proud of himself, the debonair smile on his face especially growing when you released the grip on his shirt in favour of covering a part of your face, thoroughly embarrassed, "That is by far the worst line I've ever heard, coming from you."

"Oh, I know," He shrugged, leaning in closer, "But it's worth seeing that pretty face of yours scrunch up like that."

He pressed his lips against yours before you could even respond with a snarky remark, pulling away just as fast in favour of the adorable stupefied look you always had each time he or Deuc had taken you by surprise.

"But it does smell good in here." He brought up back up from the dip before taking a good whiff of your homemade gravy in the pot.

"Only the best for the best," You mused, hearing him purr in agreement for a moment before adding, "Oh, and for you too, I guess."

He was speechless, to say the least. At least for a while.

"Why, you," He didn't even give you the time to turn away before he attacked your neck and collarbone with wet kisses, the exaggerated sounds of his smooches growing louder the more you cried out to him to stop.

He did, eventually, but he made sure he gave you enough to sag in his arms, resting against him for a moment as he mumbled against your cold skin.

"Would be nice if we had the night to ourselves." Oh. You covered your face yet again, now with both of your hands.

"Not you too," You felt the chuckle vibrating through him, "You and Deuc planned this, didn't you?"

"Depends," He drawled, clearly feigning ignorance, "Is it working?"

Fuck yeah, it is.

"You're gonna have to try harder than that."

Big mistake.

Your mouth gaped open wide as though you had surprised yourself, knowing he had taken your statement as a challenge when he pursed his lips.

"Challenge accepted."

You squeaked as he pulled you to his chest, one of his hands remained on your hips while raising the other that he intertwined with yours. You were sure his eyes had dilated, enjoying the way you bashfully look up at him through your lashes, gasping as soon as his hand crept up past the hem of your shirt.

"Peter," You giggled nervously, "Where is that hand going?"

He hummed.

"Places."

Just then, he switched directions, sliding further down before moving under the waistband of your shorts.

"Places where I'd want to touch," Down, "To kiss," Up, "To lick," Down, "To nibble on."

Each time his hands move, no matter where they ended up, all you could do was shiver. He dipped his head, nibbling on your earlobe.

"If and only if my angel says so."

He was seeking your permission—just like Deuc did.

"I want to," Oh? "But later, okay?" Oh. You tried not to giggle as he deflated from your answer, "Especially since the two of you haven't made it any easier for me to say no today."

Not that you'd ever deny these two whatsoever.

"Please?" You cupped his face, thinking through your next words before mumbling, "Just hold on for a few hours and I'm all yours and Deuc's."

His eyes dilated from the mere promise, holding onto both of your hands and pulling you in to capture your lips with his. It was as deep and passionate as the one you had with Deuc, your legs nearly buckled if it wasn't for his quick reflex.

"Pretty girl, you'll be the death of me."

The audacity.

"Oh, like you're any better," You rolled your eyes playfully, "Now, you either help me with the potatoes or take these plates and march out to the dining room."

He opted for the potatoes, occasionally leaving kisses on your shoulders and nearly causing you to burn the caramel sauce that you were making to pair with your homemade ice cream.

Deuc came down to the kitchen a little while later, only to shoot a glare at Peter for putting him on dishes duty. You saw the way Peter smirked as Deuc stalked out, dropping his expression to a barely innocent kind when he noticed you watching him.

"A grump, let me tell you," Peter commented, not bothering to lower his voice and earning himself a growl from the other room. You silently giggled before pushing him lightly.

Quarter past seven, and you walked out to serve the big pot of stroganoff and a whole bunch of sides in the dining room, where Deuc had just finished wiping the last cutlery. As soon as he did, he wrapped one arm around you, resting his head against your tummy. You could tell he was a little miffed over the petty arrangement, so you leaned in and kissed the crown of his head a couple of times, drawing a soft laugh from him.

No doubt Peter had seen you trying to cheer Deuc up and would probably cage you in his arms until you do the same for him.

A couple of hugs and hundreds more kisses later, the pack finally arrived, their exhaustion from surviving the week palpable as they greeted you with hugs or the Hale's exchanging meaningful pleasantries with you.

Deuc and Peter watched as your face continued to light up, from scooping a generous portion of noodles and stroganoff to listening to each and every one of them about the rough week they all had. Though Deuc and Peter chimed in once in a while, the pack could tell they were giving you most of the spotlight. This dinner was your idea, after all, treating the pack with the endless amount of love you had to offer. They only helped you out, though they'd gladly accept your gratitude at any given moment.

You were not blind to the looks they gave you either, so soft, even you didn't think they were capable of such emotion. You've either looked away or rushed out to the kitchen to 'top up the necessary' as a poor excuse to shy away from their gazes.

Soon, things began to calm down, and you shooed the pack to the living room, but not before being bombarded by offers to do the dishes. You gave in, eventually, and as soon as the final plate was washed, you pointed to the living room, much to everyone’s amusement.

Besides Deuc and Peter, who were helping you with the leftovers, everyone else started doing their own thing in the meantime; Scott, Stiles and Lydia were already lying on your rug, Malia and Kira were looking at your bookshelf, ranging from interesting novels with odd titles to the fishbowl of Marimo moss balls, because you wanted a ‘pet’ that ‘understood you best’.

None of the pack understood you till this day, not until Kira pointed out that Marimo moss balls survived best in low light, and you heard the rest of the pack answer with a collective ‘ooh’.

Derek, just like his cousin, had been doing the same, but from the comforts of the couch he was lounging on instead. Though he was the only one on his own, he seemed to be at peace, the deep wrinkles usually etched in between his eyebrows nowhere to be seen as dinner finally caught up to him. All in all, everyone was looking and feeling much better when they first arrived, but you couldn’t blame them. They were carrying responsibilities that were thrice as heavy as an average teenager.

Basically, you were glad to see them finally taking a load off.

The relief you were practically giving off to both Peter and Deuc was endearing, seeing your unfaltering smile despite the way your sensitive nose scrunched up a couple of times as you scooped the gravy into a container.

“You were right, angel,” Deuc was the first to speak up since the comfortable silence, “This dinner night was worth it.”

“Really?” The shine in your eyes was enough of a solid answer, “What changed?”

“That,” You tilted your head, “That pretty smile of yours.”

You mustered up a nervous smile, peeping out a small ‘oh’ before continuing with the leftovers.

At least, you tried to.

“No, no,” Peter came up behind you, intertwining his fingers with yours, “What did we say about hiding your smile?”

You peered up at Deuc, who nodded you encouragingly.

“That it only encourages you two to make me smile even more.” You whispered just enough for them to hear, trying your hardest to look elsewhere as they praised you with a simultaneous ‘atta girl’. Peter raised your laced hands, kissing the back of yours while Deuc took the other and did the same.

And just to spite you in the best way possible, they kissed either of your cheek, Deuc taking your left whereas Peter on your right.

But before they could melt you further, you heard an ‘oop’, followed by Lydia’s ‘Stiles!’ before she dragged him off. The poor boy had accidentally seen the tooth-rotting display at its peak, especially between his former nemeses and his godmother. It didn’t bother them in the slightest though. They turned to you, only to see your wide-eyed mortification. You could’ve really traumatized him or anyone else for that matter, had Stiles’ interruption not happened, and you had no doubt these two could care less in favour of devouring you in the kitchen.

Shameless.

But you loved them anyway.

That still didn’t stop you from glaring at the two, at least you tried to, losing your composure when they both ganged up on you with their knowing smirk—a telltale that they haven’t forgotten about your promise.

They eventually put you out of your misery, but their lingering touches had only been amped up to the max, letting you know that they were growing impatient to have you.

And the second the pack leaves, boy, were you in for the night.

˚ · . f i n . · ˚

» gorgeous rose divider by @firefly-graphics ♡

°˖✧◝(⁰▿⁰)◜✧˖° just an introductory tag! @christinasyellowflowers @clockworkballerina @marianne-zemo @spicymau-5

#— reve's reverie 🌹 #a little more love series #MR BOHEN & MR EMERY THIS IS FOR YOU #peter hale x reader #peter hale x fem!reader #peter hale x you #peter hale #deucalion x reader #deucalion x fem!reader #deucalion x you #deucalion #peter hale x reader x deucalion #ian hohen #gideon emery #teen wolf #teen wolf x reader #stiles stilinski #scott mccall #derek hale #malia hale #lydia martin #kira yukimura #yes it's titled after red velvet #and i'll do it again

[inneroptics]

Emery P. Reves-Biro, 1930

[jacobbseedd]

Here’s an updated oc masterlist, yes I redid alot so be prepared.

Farcry 5:

Eden’s Gate Main:

Michaela Reece Campbell - Jeanine Mason

Katarina Maya Morgan - Elizabeth Gilles

Adam Blaine Strickland- Travis fimmel

Natalie Quinn Kramer - Kathryn Winnick

Bryson Kai Grant- max Parker

Jayda Raven Wright- inanna sarkis

Trenton Enzo Collymore - Kori Sampson

Jayla Rae Ford- Aj Naomi king

Braeden Weston Raymond- Will Graham

Audrey Cara baker- Chloe Bennet

Preston James Huff- Richard Harman

Nadia Jane Sutton- Kathryn Newton

Lindsey Cerys Morris- Bryce Dallas Howard

Keira Beth White - Madeline Petsch

Parker Lance Dawson- Tyler Blackburn

Maliah Cass Gordan - Morgan Crabtree

Layla Valerie Hampton - Danielle Campbell

Renne Mia Huxley - Lauren cohen

Nicholas Matteo Pearce- Kyle Allen

Michael Trace Sullivan - Will poulter

Antonio Kyson Chambers- Kieron Moore

Blake Chandler Miller- Matthew Noszka

Cassidy everly Quinn - Madelyn Cline

Eden’s Gate Minor ocs:

Darin Shane Reid- Brant Daughtery

Felix Micah Porter- Freddy Thorp

Kayden Lucian Morgan- Chris Evan’s

Jessica Nora miner - rosamund pike

Calvin Madden Price- Tyler hoechlin

Trey Draven Sanford- Aaron Taylor Johnson

Emery Cordella Combs- ayo edebiri

Jayne Rose Frey- Elle Fanning

Liam Cole Mullens- Jesse Williams

Martinez Campbell- Tom Ellis

Stephanie Woods- Inbar Lavi

Resistance Main OCs:

Larissa Leah Palmer - Marie avergolpous

Terrence Miles Harvey- Chris wood

Chase Lucca Gray- Theo James

Malcolm Jay Bryant - Ryan Guzman

Lauren Grace Shaffer- Hillary Burton

Annabel Kaylyn Chavez- Rose Salazar

Charles Gage Fisher- Pedro Pascal

Elena Katie Smith- Lucy Hale

Isaiah Theo Farley- Federico massaro

Conner Ryder Knight- Logan lerman

Robin Kelsey Norwood- Dianna Agron

Sean Corey Harrison- Alexander Ludwig

Resistance Minor ocs:

Aiden Nico Davenport- Rafael l Silva

Davina Brielle Ramsey- Rachel Zegler

Shaw Damon Harrison- Travis van Winkle

Grand Theft Auto Five ocs:

Addison Belle Becker - Meg Donnelly

Kyler atlas miller - Carlos Cuevas

Resident Evil 3 remake ocs:

COD ocs:

Olive Maeve Rowland - Leah Pipes

Makeena Sky Marks- Zoey Deutch

Red dead redemption two ocs:

Eliza Jane Evermore - Isabel May

Farcry New Dawn:

Drake Zachary Huffman - Nico Tortorella

Cody Noah Mcconell - Ken bek

Summer Grace Meadows - Dorit revelis

TLOU2:

Bethany Marina Hester- Kate Winslet

Watch Dogs: Legion

Cheyenne Bella Reid - Elora Danan

Brandon Andres Simpson- Jonathan Bailey

#oc masterlist

[north-richland-hills-tx-living]

Truck Insurance Provider

Truck insurance is often a legal requirement imposed by government authorities. Most jurisdictions require commercial vehicles to carry a minimum liability insurance coverage to protect against potential damages and injuries caused by the truck while in operation. Failure to have adequate truck insurance can result in fines, penalties, and even suspending your business operations. The insurance needs of trucking businesses can vary based on factors such as the type of trucks, cargo being transported, driving records, and the scope of operations. Lone Star Best Insurance is a company that offers truck insurance in Dallas, TX. They are a reliable insurance provider that will help you protect your business assets, reputation, and long-term viability.

Annual Events in Dallas, Texas

Held annually from late September to mid-October at Fair Park, the State Fair of Texas is a beloved tradition in Dallas. It features many attractions, including live music concerts, carnival rides, livestock shows, art exhibitions, and the iconic Texas Star Ferris wheel. The fair also showcases unique food creations like fried treats and Texan cuisine. Dallas Blooms is a vibrant springtime event at the Dallas Arboretum and Botanical Garden from late February to early April. The garden comes alive with blooming flowers, including tulips, daffodils, and azaleas. One of the largest film festivals in Texas, the Dallas International Film Festival takes place annually in April. It showcases diverse international and independent films, featuring screenings, panel discussions, workshops, and awards ceremonies. These are just a few examples of the annual events in Dallas.

Dallas Museum of Art (DMA)

The Dallas Museum of Art houses a vast collection of artworks from around the world. The displays represent various artistic styles and mediums, including paintings, sculptures, decorative arts, photography, and new media. Some highlights of the collection include works by renowned artists such as Claude Monet, Vincent van Gogh, Jackson Pollock, Georgia O'Keeffe, and Frida Kahlo. It is also known for its special collections, which focus on specific areas of art. These include the Wendy and Emery Reves Collection, which features an extensive collection of European art and decorative arts from the 18th and 19th centuries, and the Keir Collection of Islamic Art, which displays various Islamic art and artifacts. The museum also regularly hosts temporary exhibitions that showcase specific themes, artists, or art movements.

Far North Dallas Is Safe To Live But Unsafe To Drive

One of the leading causes of car accidents is distracted driving, including texting, talking on the phone, eating, or using in-car technologies while driving. When drivers divert their attention from the road, their ability to react to hazards diminishes, increasing the risk of an accident. Operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or certain medications impairs a driver's judgment, coordination, and reaction time. Impaired drivers have diminished vehicle control and are more likely to cause accidents. Reckless behaviors such as aggressive driving, tailgating, sudden lane changes, running red lights, and poor road conditions also increase the chances of accidents. Click here to read more.

Link to Map

Driving Direction

Dallas Museum of Art

1717 N Harwood St, Dallas, TX 75201, United States

Continue to I-35E N

4 min (1.1 mi)

Continue on I-35E N. Take Texas 121 TEXpress/Texas 183 TEXpress and TX-183 W to NE Loop 820 in North Richland Hills. Take exit 21 from I-820 W

23 min (25.6 mi)

Follow NE Loop 820 to your destination

2 min (0.6 mi)

Lone Star Best Insurance

6851 NE Loop 820 

Suite 220, 

North Richland Hills, TX 76180,

#Insurance agency in Dallas TX #Commercial insurance in Dallas TX #Health insurance in Dallas TX #Home insurance in Dallas TX #Life insurance in Dallas TX

[macrolit]

I bought this book last month and found this bookmark, which has been tucked away in it for more than 60 years. 

#penguin books #bookmark #old books #bookmarks #bookshop #united kingdom #uk #books #photography #the anatomy of peace #emery reves #world affairs

[nervoservo]

Emery P. Reves-Biro - Untitled, 1930s

#Emery P. Reves-Biro

[joeinct]

Untitled, Photo by Emery P. Reves-Biro, 1930s

#emery p. reves-biro

[odd-era]

Emery P. Reves-Biro | circa 1930’s

[digital-arts-etc]

Clean House to Survive?

Museums Confront Their Crowded Basements

With storage spaces filled with works that may never be shown, some museums are rethinking the way they collect art, and at least one is ranking what it owns.

By ROBIN POGREBIN - MARCH 10, 2019

Paintings line the basement storage space at The Indianapolis Museum of Art, which has graded its entire collection to help determine what art it may want to sell or transfer to another institution. Indianapolis Museum of Art at Newfields; Lyndon French for The New York Times

Fueled by philanthropic zeal, lucrative tax deductions and the prestige of seeing their works in esteemed settings, wealthy art owners have for decades given museums everything from their Rembrandts to their bedroom slippers.

It all had to go somewhere. So now, many American museums are bulging with stuff — so much stuff that some house thousands of objects that have never been displayed but are preserved, at considerable cost, in climate-controlled storage spaces.

At the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston: ashtrays, cocktail napkins, wine glasses. At the Indianapolis

Art Museum: doilies, neckties and women’s underwear.

In storage at the Brooklyn Museum: a roomful of home décor textiles, a full-size Rockefeller Center elevator and a trove of fake old master paintings the museum is barred from unloading.

Some collections have grown tenfold in the past 50 years. Most museums display only a fraction of the works they own, in large part because so many are prints and drawings that can only sparingly be shown because of light sensitivity.

“There is this inevitable march where you have to build more storage, more storage, more storage,” said Charles L. Venable, the director of the Indianapolis Museum of Art at Newfields. “I don’t think it’s sustainable.”

His museum was so jammed with undisplayed artwork that it was about to spend about $14 million to double its storage space until he abruptly canceled the plan.

Instead, it embarked on an ambitious effort to rank each of the 54,000 items in its collection with letter grades. Twenty percent of the items received a D, making them ripe to be sold or given to another institution.

Not long ago, such ratings would have struck many in the museum world as crass. But Mr. Venable is now at the vanguard of a growing number of museum directors who are taking a hard look at how much they have and how they collect art because they fear a history of voracious stockpiling and the pressure to acquire still more is creating a crisis for American museums.

“It doesn’t benefit anyone when there are thousands, if not millions, of works of art that are languishing in storage,” said Glenn D. Lowry, the director of the Museum of Modern Art. “There is a huge capital cost that has a drag on operations. But more importantly, we would be far better off allowing others to have those works of art who might enjoy them.”

MoMA regularly culls its collection and in 2017 sold off a major Léger to the Houston art museum. Yet, it too is in the midst of yet another costly renovation (price tag $400 million) to be able to exhibit more of its ever growing collection.

Part of the problem is that acquiring new things is far easier, and more glamorous, than getting rid of old ones. Deaccessioning, the formal term for disposing of an art object, is a careful, cumbersome process, requiring several levels of curatorial, administrative and board approval. Museum directors who try to clean out their basements often confront restrictive donor agreements and industry guidelines that treat collections as public trusts.

Collections have ballooned in the past 50 years.

Some major American museums have seen the size of their collections soar. Even the oldest institutions often saw their holdings double or triple in number

Percent change in collection size, 1970 to present

Brooklyn Museum...3%

MFA Boston...................75%

Philadelphia Museum of Art......114%

Denver Art Museum........................251%

Indianapolis Museum of Art..................265%

Metropolitan Museum of Art................... 329%

Whitney Museum................................................692%

Dallas Museum of Art...............................................818%

SF MoMA......................................................................1014%

MFA Houstob..............................................................................1438%

            100%       300          500      700       900        1,100       1,300  

Major museums are only able to display a small portion of their collection.

Number of objects on display at a given time:

300,000 objects

.........................Dallas Museum of Art

..................................Whitney Museum

600,000................................... SF MoMA

......................................................Indianapolis Museum of Art

..............................................................MFA Houston

900,000...........................................................Denver Art Museum

...................................................................................Brooklyn Museum

..........................................................................Philadelphia Museum of Art

1,200,000.................................................................................MFA Boston

1,500,000..........................................................Metropolitan Museum of Art

The percentage on display is affected by space constraints, but also by how much of a collection is devoted to works on paper, which cannot be shown for long due to light sensitivity. The Met collection is particularly weighted toward works on paper, but its percentage on display, about 4 percent, is in rough parity with other museums on the list.

And many still hold the view that a wholesale parting with objects can be risky. Overlooked art comes back in style. Forgotten treasures turn up. Many pieces, they argue, should be retained for scholars, regardless of how often they go on public view. And much art still needs to be acquired as museums respond to the soaring popularity of contemporary art and aim to integrate more work by women and artists of color.

“People can’t understand why museums have more than they can show at any given time,” said the critic and curator Robert Storr. “But preserving the best of the past — no matter how unpopular it may temporarily become — is the purpose of museums. They should protect their holdings; they shouldn’t jettison them for short-term gains or savings.”

But holding on to it all has consequences, most notably the pressure to build new exhibition wings. Some wealthy collectors take matters into their own hands, creating private museums to retain control of what goes on view.

Eli Broad, the philanthropist, said one reason he created his own Los Angeles museum, the Broad, was to ensure a proper display of his impressive collection of modern and contemporary art.

“I don’t see how giving art to museums that are not prepared to show a fair amount of it makes any sense,” Mr. Broad said. “Of the 2,000 works in our collection, I got the sense they would show 1 or 2 percent of the work and the rest would go in storage.”

Generous to a Fault?

The current museum storage predicament has its roots in gifts like Adelaide Milton de Groot’s to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Upon her death at 91 in 1967, she did not give just a few paintings from her collection. She gave all of them — more than 200.

Thomas Hoving, then director of the Met, recalled in his 1993 book, “Making the Mummies Dance: Inside the Metropolitan Museum of Art,” that he was “shocked” to learn from his No. 2, Theodore Rousseau, that “only half a dozen paintings” were first-rate.

“Many of the other pictures were not even worth showing,” he wrote. Upset, Mr. Hoving said he demanded an answer from Rousseau, “What were we going to do with them?”

“Put them in storage or sell them was his answer,” he added.

Adelaide Milton de Groot, who died in 1967, arranged in her will to leave more than 200 paintings to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Sidney J Waintrob; Budd Studio

Museums have always had to be diplomatic with important collectors. With acquisition budgets so limited, they have long depended on donors’ largess.

“Museums were accepting with less criticality when collections were smaller,” said James Rondeau, director of the Art Institute of Chicago. “We took 12 when we might not have even taken one.”

Some donors were able to dictate terms.

In 1985, when the philanthropist Wendy Reves donated more than 1,400 works from the collection of her late husband Emery Reves to the Dallas Museum of Art, she required that it re-create five rooms from their villa in the South of France — including furnishings from the décor of the home’s original owner Coco Chanel. Among the accouterments in the display: Mrs. Reves’ slippers beside the bed.

Four years ago, Stefan Edlis and Gael Neeson gave the Art Institute 42 contemporary works worth an estimated $400 million. It was the largest gift of art in the museum’s history and came with a stipulation: All the works have to be on display for the next 50 years.

“I got the deal of a lifetime,” Mr. Edlis said in an interview.

In the case of Ms. de Groot’s large gift to the Met, the museum sold some 50 pieces, and ended up with much public criticism and an inquiry by the Attorney General’s office as to whether the Met had trampled on the intent of Ms. de Groot’s will.

Two years later, Mr. Hoving agreed to accept the collection of the investment banker Robert Lehman — at 2,600 works, then the largest art donation in the Met’s history. Though some art critics questioned its quality, the Met built a wing to display the collection, with rooms that re-created the Lehman family residence.

Under the Lehman Foundation’s agreement with the Met, the collection will remain in the museum forever.

Today the Met’s collection tops 1.5 million items,  many of them stored in 105,000 square feet of on-site storage, the equivalent of almost two football fields, and four off-site locations in New York and New Jersey.

Max Hollein, director of the Met, said the collection’s size reflects that the museum’s mission extends beyond display. “We also preserve the cultural heritage of humankind,” he said, but added that going forward, “Our focus at the Met is not going to be on what we still need but on what we have and how we display it.”

As Mr. Hoving found out, deaccessioning can sometimes be a dirty word. A routine practice, it is nonetheless often fraught with controversy. Won’t donors be insulted when museums re-gift or sell their donated work? Aren’t such gifts, underwritten by taxpayers, part of the public trust?

The Berkshire Museum Museum drew protests when it announced a plan to sell art from its collection in 2017. Gillian Jones/The Berkshire Eagle, via Associated Press

Moreover, the Association of Museum Directors has strict guidelines dictating that proceeds from such sales can only be used to acquire more work, not to cover operating costs like staff salaries. Institutions that have violated these rules in the name of financial survival — including New York’s National Academy of Design, the Delaware Art Museum and the Berkshire Museum— have been labeled pariahs, in some cases penalized by the refusal of other institutions to lend works.

“If an institution is faced with an existential threat, isn’t it better for the institution to survive with some works of art than no works of art?” countered Gary Tinterow, director of the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, defending the Shelburne Museum in Vermont’s decision to sell $25 million worth of art in 1996. Mr. Tinterow said his museum has gradually been getting rid of the excess in its two house collections of decorative arts — including those ashtrays and stemware.

Anne Pasternak, the director of the Brooklyn Museum, said there is increasing discussion these days about revisiting the strictures of deaccessioning policies. But she acknowledged “there is a lot of fear around this conversation.”

From Dusty Attic to Modern Museum

From the Brooklyn Museum’s first days, storage was an issue. When its Beaux-Arts building on Eastern Parkway was built in 1893, the museum was focused on amassing enough art to put on view, not where to keep it.

“They took just about anything that was offered and thought maybe someday it will be useful,” said Kevin Stayton, the museum’s chief curator emeritus.

In those early years, random spaces were recruited to house things. “You had storerooms and you threw work in it,” Ms. Pasternak said.

Some donors literally dropped their collections at the door. One art dealer, Ivan C. Karp, persuaded the museum, starting in the 1950s, to take some 400 fragments of ornate terra cotta and stone mythological creatures that he and friends had salvaged from demolition sites. They were stored in the museum’s backyard. Some were used for a sculpture garden. Others ended up in a parking lot.

Objects stored in remote areas came to be forgotten. Such was the case about 20 years ago, when curators found an old slab of marble leaning against a back storage wall. It was a delicately carved 1860s relief by an important self-taught sculptor, Margaret Foley.                     

Arnold Lehman, who led the museum from 1997 to 2015, recalled confronting the great morass, including more than 23,000 items of American and European clothing and accessories, an impressive but fragile collection that was costly to maintain.

One advancement in storage has been to make it visible to the public as done here in the Brooklyn Museum's Luce Center for American Art. Andrea Mohin/The New York Times

“I kept saying that we weren’t equipped to deal with this properly,” Mr. Lehman said.

He set out to consolidate and now the museum is that rare art institution that holds fewer items today than it did 10 years ago.

Not that it was easy.

Some complained when Mr. Lehman transferred some 1,500 terra-cotta pieces to a foundation in St. Louis. There was grumbling when he sent the museum’s huge trove of costumes to the Met in 2008 under a deal that gave Brooklyn continuing access, and its name on the collection.

Mr. Lehman was never able to unload some of the 926 items that were bequested by Col. Michael Friedsam, once president of the department store B. Altman, who died in 1932.

A quarter of the gifts, including old master paintings, turned out to be fake, misattributed or of poor quality. The museum still stores and cares for them because the courts have ruled that, under the colonel’s will, deaccessioning requires permission from his executors. The last of them died in 1962.

The Brooklyn Museum storage facilities are updated today. Paintings hang on special racks; objects returning from loan are temporarily isolated, lest they be carrying pests; and an open storage area allows visitors to see items that would otherwise be out of view.

But Ms. Pasternak, who took over as director in 2016, is continuing to look at “next steps” regarding storage. One focus: a room that holds thousands of textiles, European tapestries and lace, and some furniture.

She would like to turn it into a gallery for African art. The cost-benefit analysis, she said, seems straightforward: “A permanent home for an African art gallery versus storing something that we’ve never shown.”

  The Indianapolis Museum of Art at Newfields has deaccessioned more than 4,600 works since beginning a major study of its collection in 2011. Lyndon French for The New York Times

On the Front Lines: Indianapolis                                              

If you want to start an argument, there are few better ways than assigning something a grade.

So Mr. Venable created quite a stir by deciding to rank the entire collection of his Indianapolis museum.

Founded in 1883, the museum shows 8 to 10 percent of its collection at any one time. The ranking began in 2011 when a Mellon Foundation grant paid for outside experts to spend six years reviewing the collection.

His own staff then built on that work. By the end every item had a grade: “A being a masterpiece,” Mr. Venable said, “and D being maybe onetime in the distant past this was a valuable object for us but we probably shouldn’t hang on to that.”

The assessment measured a work’s aesthetic qualities, its physical condition and whether the museum perhaps had better examples of the genre. Mr. Venable decided not to keep art purely for study, asking. “How many scholars actually look at those things on an annual basis?”

Now comes the tough part — getting rid of the works through sale or transfer to another institution. What may be a D painting to a large, encyclopedic museum, which has several by that artist, may be an A to a smaller institution, which has none.

Charles L. Venable, director of the Indianapolis Museum of Art at Newfields. Lyndon French for The New York Times

The storage spaces at Indianapolis. The conservation of art requires an understanding of aesthetics, logistics, the science of materials and how they react over time and to other substances. Lyndon French for The New York Times

Since 2011, the Indianapolis museum has deaccessioned 4,615 objects, with the vast majority of those having been sold. Some 124 works have been transferred to other institutions, including art glass from the Marilyn and Eugene Glick Collection.

The museum decided that only some of the collection’s 250 pieces were worth keeping, so Mr. Venable approached the Glicks' grandson-in-law, David Barrett — a museum trustee — about transferring some to another institution.

The Marilyn K. Glick Center for Glass at Ball State University in Muncie, Ind., soon received 60 pieces from Indianapolis.

That kind of flexibility is essential to museum survival going forward, Mr. Venable said.

”What is the balance between almost obsessively art collecting and spending vast amounts of resources on it?” he said. “Are we really just addicts collecting objects that our curators bring in generation after generation?”

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/10/arts/museum-art-quiz.html

=============================

Collections have ballooned in the past 50 years.

Some major American museums have seen the size of their collections soar. Even the oldest institutions often saw their holdings double or triple in number

Percent change in collection size, 1970 to present

Brooklyn Museum...3%

MFA Boston...................75%

Philadelphia Museum of Art......114%

Denver Art Museum........................251%

Indianapolis Museum of Art..................265%

Metropolitan Museum of Art................... 329%

Whitney Museum................................................692%

Dallas Museum of Art...............................................818%

SF MoMA......................................................................1014%

MFA Houstob..............................................................................1438%

            100%       300          500      700       900        1,100       1,300  

Major museums are only able to display a small portion of their collection.

Number of objects on display at a given time

300,000 objects

.........................Dallas Museum of Art

..................................Whitney Museum

600,000................................... SF MoMA

......................................................Indianapolis Museum of Art

..............................................................MFA Houston

900,000...........................................................Denver Art Museum

...................................................................................Brooklyn Museum

...............................................................Philadelphia Museum of Art

1,200,000..................................................................MFA Boston

1,500,000..........................................................Metropolitan Museum of Art

The percentage on display is affected by space constraints, but also by how much of a collection is devoted to works on paper, which cannot be shown for long due to light sensitivity. The Met collection is particularly weighted toward works on paper, but its percentage on display, about 4 percent, is in rough parity with other museums on the list.

The Indianapolis Museum of Art has ranked its collection with letter grades to determine which works may be a drain on resources. Which one do you think got an A?

Grade: C  Cour d'une Ferme    Maurice de Vlaminck    c. 1926                

Grade: A   Jimson Weed   Georgia O’Keeffe   1936                

Grade: B   The Flight into Egypt    Marc Chagall    1943-44                

Grade: D  Seascape   A follower of Willem van de Velde II 17th century

  Right!                   

The Chagall won praise for its “whimsy and pathos,” but curators celebrated “Jimson Weed,” calling it O’Keefe’s “largest and most ambitious floral work.” They noted, “The use of three blooms separates it in quality and importance among its peers of similar composition and subject.”   “Seascape” earned its low grade in part because of a large hole in the canvas but also because it’s not by Velde, but a “follower of” Velde. In sum, a curator wrote: “Extremely poor condition. Poor quality painting.”        

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/10/arts/museum-art-quiz.html

[75centralphotography]

Geometries in the Blue Sky -

The Emery Reves Arch of Peace rises into the clear sky at the Meyerson Symphony Center in the Dallas Arts District.

#Dallas-Fort Worth #Architecture #Dallas #Dallas Arts District #Meyerson Symphony Center #Sky #Texas

[theforloveandart]

Study this painting for a minute or two, and distinguish your experience... Manet's "Best of Show" painting enjoys a continental provenance, once a featured gem in Emery and Wendy Reves' marvelous collection at "La Pausa," Coco Chanel's former villa near the Riviera, and now and forever on view at the @dallasmuseumart. Come visit! The enchanted throng at the Anthology of Plano immediately succumbed to its beauty, sat and pondered in silence, almost as if in church. Then, Gloria quipped, "it reminds me of a cross!" This insight would have pleased Manet immensely. In failing health, he intended this work featuring a cruciform bouquet and trinity of roses to presence God, in gratitude for a life well-lived. What say you, curious viewer? #loveart #seniors #hospice #hospitals #digitalArtBook #VAMedicalCenters #nursinghomes #nonprofit #therapeuticart #museums #artbook #volunteer #donate #charity #dallasmuseumofart #artexperience #love #art #greatnonprofits #artforallages #givingtuesday https://www.instagram.com/p/CYown0Qr6ez/?utm_medium=tumblr

#loveart #seniors #hospice #hospitals #digitalartbook #vamedicalcenters #nursinghomes #nonprofit #therapeuticart #museums #artbook #volunteer #donate #charity #dallasmuseumofart #artexperience #love #art #greatnonprofits #artforallages #givingtuesday

[reveluving]

just a nip ; peter hale x reader x deucalion

summary: you don't understand your husbands' obsession with your fangs, and you most certainly don't question it.

warnings: some s~mut (kinky husbands, so minors DNI!) + soft & sweet!

a/n: more of our fav canine duo and their vamp wife! had this lil' idea for MONTHS so I had to let it out eventually hhhh don’t forget to leave some sugar! ᐠ( ᐛ )ᐟ

» fancy reading the series? check out the m.list!

» smut includes; kinky soft dom husbands, unprotected sex (p in v), petnames ('pretty girl', 'sweetheart', 'angel'), mentions of making a facial mess, mild edging & punishment??

'A sight that they will forever treasure.' ;

Their obsession with your fangs goes beyond your expectation but for different reasons. Peter likes the surprised look on your face whenever he sticks his finger in your mouth as you yawn the way an owner would to their cat. Whether you’re in a jolly mood or going through your worst day so far, you can’t help but share the amusement he has for his habit. Deuc, on the other hand, is no stranger to doing the same but often, in a more, intimate setting. If you happened to be riding his cock? Oh, it riles him up like no other. He’ll be straight-up kinky; shoving a finger or two in your mouth to lightly run them across your little canines. He’d be smug, especially if you’re staring back into his eyes as yours glow unnaturally, wishing you could wipe the smirk off his face. 

That’s not to say they’re not in the mood to switch; Deuc loves seeing your pupils contract into slits as he teases you about your cat-like behaviour the same way Peter enjoys feeling your fangs when you go to town between the sheets, but you can tell they have their own preference over the other. 

But there is one in particular that despite never admitting it, not especially amongst each other (at least, not outwardly) is ingrained in their heads, a sight that they will forever treasure.

They have a love-hate relationship with the way you bite down on the pillow/sheets, almost shying away from one's heated gaze and obscene praises while the other growls in your ear as they pound into you from behind.

"Such a pretty, pretty girl."

"Aw, was that a little shiver I felt? You love it when I growl in your ear, don't you?"

"Don't close your eyes, sweetheart. I want those pretty eyes in me when I cum all over your face."

"You better not cum just yet, angel. You remember what happened the last time when you came without our permission, don't you?"

On one hand, they get off on the fact that the usually level-headed and sometimes bashful mother of the pack is losing herself in the sheer pleasure that only they can offer, but on the other hand, they wish to hear you scream at their mercy. Either way, they just loved how submissive you looked.

Absolute menaces.

» gorgeous rose divider by @firefly-graphics ♡

a/n: I hope my ian/gideon enthusiasts are doing fabulous, y'all better take care, ily! 🫂❤

#— reve's reverie 🌹 #back on my vampy wifey bs #a little more love series #peter hale x reader #peter hale x fem!reader #peter hale x you #peter hale #deucalion x reader #deucalion x fem!reader #deucalion x you #deucation #the deucalion #peter hale x reader x deucalion #ian bohen #gideon emery #teen wolf #teen wolf x reader #teen wolf fanfiction

[inneroptics]

Emery P. Reves-Biro

[yourjuhyunghan]

Emerging Infectious Diseases Speaking of Science through Art and Storytelling, MoMA The Museum of Modern Art ‘How Cézanne’s Apples Turned Me into a Food Writer Ruth Reichl’, Oriental Institute - University of Chicago Documenting "Yellow" Coffins from Bab el-Gasus University of Lisbon, Niccolò Pomarancio (Roncalli Cristoforo, 1517 ou 1519-après 1591), Annonciation, Palais Fesch, musée des Beaux-Arts.

Emerging Infectious Diseases Speaking of Science through Art and Storytelling, MoMA The Museum of Modern Art ‘How Cézanne’s Apples Turned Me into a Food Writer Ruth Reichl’, Oriental Institute - University of Chicago Documenting "Yellow" Coffins from Bab el-Gasus University of Lisbon, Niccolò Pomarancio (Roncalli Cristoforo, 1517 ou 1519-après 1591), Annonciation, Palais Fesch, musée des Beaux-Arts. https://blog.naver.com/artnouveau19/222492980885 https://podcasts.apple.com/kr/podcast/emerging-infectious-diseases/id212828612?i=1000533986921 https://www.moma.org/magazine/articles/617 https://www.digital-epigraphy.com/projects/documenting-yellow-coffins-of-the-so-called-eighth-lot-of-antiquities-from-bab-el-gasus?fbclid=IwAR1bu3tVT_jtxTQffJf3CQt56PwiflthnwhW0ljyOsGTTn_afHDeSY1OsGI

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=412841182108395&set=a.131132153612634

Speaking of Science through Art and Storytelling

Emerging Infectious Diseases https://podcasts.apple.com/kr/podcast/emerging-infectious-diseases/id212828612?i=1000533986921

Byron Breedlove, the managing editor of the CDC's Emerging Infectious Diseases journal, and Sarah Gregory discuss the development and evolution of EID journal cover essays.

How Cézanne’s Apples

Turned Me into a Food Writer

An author, former editor, and storied restaurant

critic recalls a turning point in her life.

Ruth Reichl

Aug 31, 2021

Paul Cézanne turned me into a food writer.

But it was not for any of the reasons you might imagine.

In the late sixties, when I was a graduate student in art history, my professors were constantly dropping the names of restaurants near great monuments of art. I wrote them all down: the trattoria five minutes from Giotto’s murals in Assisi (“get the ribollita”), the bistro around the corner from Notre Dame that served fantastic choucroute, and the 500-year-old tofu specialist near Kyoto’s Kinkaku-ji. And it was while studying Gustav Klimt that I first heard of Demel, Vienna’s venerable emporium of pastry.

The art historians I studied with also enjoyed deconstructing the many meals depicted in art. Together we devoured endless last suppers, along with the painted feasts of Bruegel, Vermeer, and Veronese. They discussed artists like Orozco and de Heem, who used food as both allegory and a means of illuminating ordinary life. And when one professor announced that his next lecture would be devoted to the food of Cézanne, I could hardly wait.

We walked into the room to find a slide of Cézanne’s Apples on the giant screen above our heads. “Cézanne,” the professor began, “once told a friend that fruits ‘love having their portraits done’.” We all stared up at the painting as he continued. “Cézanne also said that he wanted to ‘astonish Paris with an apple’.”

I concentrated on that image, waiting to be astonished. But hard as I tried, those apples left me cold. Cézanne’s apples, I soon discovered, were not apples; they were painted strokes on a canvas, and he did not want you to forget it. That was the point.

I understood what the artist was up to. That painting was about art, not apples. It was about the impossibility of ever making two dimensions truly resemble three. It is an interesting intellectual idea, and in the context of art history, an important one. But the more I stared at that painting, the more I began to wonder if I wanted to spend the rest of my life thinking about such things.

I left that class in a state of confusion. It was a beautiful fall afternoon, and as I walked back to my apartment, I couldn’t shake the feeling that there was something wrong with me. Shouldn’t a person who planned to be an art historian appreciate Cézanne’s apples? Passing a local grocery store I noticed a fine display of Ida Reds, Arkansas Blacks, and Esopus Spitzenburgs. They were beautiful; astonishing, in fact. But I had no desire to contemplate those apples; all I wanted to do was eat them. I bought as many as I could carry, determined to transform them into something delicious.

At home I peeled the apples, listening to the seductive way they came whispering out of their skins. I sliced them and showered them with lemon juice, leaning into the citric scent. Constructing a crumble, I concentrated on the way the butter became one with the flour. And then, surrounded by the heady aroma of sugar, butter, and fruit swirling through my kitchen, I opened my notebooks and began to read.

The evidence was all there: I was looking at art but focusing on food. I was clearly not meant to be an art historian. Much as I enjoyed studying art, my true passions lay elsewhere. By the time the apples emerged from the oven, my life had chang https://www.moma.org/magazine/articles/617

MoMA The Museum of Modern Art

@MuseumModernArt

·

“Cézanne turned me into a food writer.”

After an art history lecture on #Cézanne food, 

@ruthreichl

 went home to make an Apple Crumble—a dessert that would alter the course of her life.

Read Reichl's story and get the recipe: https://www.moma.org/magazine/articles/617 https://twitter.com/MuseumModernArt/status/1433245560509710336

MoMA The Museum of Modern Art 

“Cézanne turned me into a food writer.”

As a graduate student in art history, #RuthReichl deconstructed the many meals depicted in art and took notes on great restaurants near art monuments. 

After a lecture on #Cézanne’s apples, Reichl went home to make an apple crumble—a dessert that would alter the course of her life.

After receiving her Masters in the History of Art in 1970, she became the restaurant critic and food editor of the Los Angeles Times, the restaurant critic of the New York Times, and the Editor in Chief of Gourmet Magazine.

With fall just around the corner and “Cézanne Drawing” closing on September 25, @ruth.reichl shares her apple crumble recipe with us. Read Reichl’s story for #MoMAMagazine: mo.ma/2YjJBhR

—

[1] Paul Cézanne. Still Life with Apples on a Sideboard (Pommes avec bouteille, pichet et pot bleu).” 1900-1906. Pencil and watercolor on paper. Dallas Museum of Art. The Wendy and Emery Reves Collection [2] Ruth Reichl as a graduate student [3] Photo by Mikkel Vang

https://www.facebook.com/MuseumofModernArt/photos/pcb.10160471355597281/10160471347567281/

Documenting "Yellow" Coffins from Bab el-Gasus

June 24. 2021

Written by Rogério Sousa, Professor of Egyptology and Ancient History at the Centre for History of the Faculty of Humanities, University of Lisbon. Gate of the Priests Project.

When in 2009 I was entrusted with the mission of producing a catalogue of the coffin sets of the so-called "Eighth Lot of Antiquities" from Bab el-Gasus (Sousa 2017), I could hardly imagine that this would be a turning moment of my life as a researcher (Fig. 1). This collection had been given in 1893 by the Egyptian authorities, just two years after its discovery. Bab el-Gasus was discovered by Eugène Grébaut and Georges Daressy, containing the undisturbed burial sets of 153 priests and priestesses of Amun who lived during the 21st Dynasty. Due to the sheer size of the find, a decision was made to offer some of these antiquities to Egypt's countries with diplomatic relations. In 1893, when the young khedive Habas II Hilmi was crowned, 17 lots of antiquities were prepared and shipped to the respective countries. The Portuguese Lot was entrusted to the Sociedade de Geografia de Lisboa (Fig. 2). It included five anthropoid coffins (four inner coffins and one outer coffin), three mummy covers, and a sample of shabtis. Like most other lots from Bab el-Gasus, this collection remained in the Museum's storerooms and unpublished. https://www.digital-epigraphy.com/projects/documenting-yellow-coffins-of-the-so-called-eighth-lot-of-antiquities-from-bab-el-gasus?fbclid=IwAR1bu3tVT_jtxTQffJf3CQt56PwiflthnwhW0ljyOsGTTn_afHDeSY1OsGI

Oriental Institute - University of Chicago

August 30 at 2:00 AM

 This week digitalEPIGRAPHY is looking at “Documenting ‘Yellow’ Coffins from Bab el-Gasus” by Rogério Sousa, Professor of Egyptology and Ancient History at the University of Lisbon.

Prof. Sousa briefly reviews the history of these remarkable anthropoid coffins (from a large cache of undisturbed burials of priests and priestesses of Amun from Dynasty 21, discovered near the mortuary temple of Hatshepsut and given to Portugal in the late 1800s). He then highlights the imperative need for drawings, as so much of the decorative detail was not visible in photographs (image 2), and discusses the importance of the drawings for his further work on understanding these incredibly elaborate coffins (images 3 and 4)!

https://www.facebook.com/OrientalInstitute/photos/pcb.10159489136319486/10159489118499486/

Niccolò Pomarancio (Roncalli Cristoforo, 1517 ou 1519-après 1591), Annonciation, 56x39 cm, Palais Fesch, musée des Beaux-Arts. https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=412841182108395&set=a.131132153612634

[matthewfelixsun]

DSCN8519 _ The Pont Neuf in Paris, 1871. Oil on canvas, 20 1/4 x 28 1/2 in. Dallas Museum of Art. The Wendy and Emery Reves Collection, Monet - The Early Years, Legion of Honor by Matthew Felix Sun Via Flickr: "Monet: The Early Years" at San Francisco Legion of Honor Fine Arts Museum But, some of the brushstrokes Monet employed had become noticeably looser and more fluid.

#Monet #Painting #French #Art #Fine Art #San Francisco #Museum #Legion of Honor #2017