Fun, feeding and fancies...
Some History Channel fun:
Check out my Dark Ages Lady profile!
Check out my Dark Ages Viking profile!
Check out my Dark Ages Nun profile!
Check out my Dark Ages Peasant profile!
Okay! Well, the last few days have been something. Thursday, Adrian had oatmeal for the first time. He seems to like it about as well as he does rice cereal. On Friday, he had carrots for the first time. I don't think he liked them as well as squash or sweet potatoes. When I put the first spoonful in his mouth, he looked at me as if he were going to cry! XD He didn't cry, but he DID cut his first tooth! Today he cut his second. Both are the bottom incisors, with his right one followed by the left. They aren't fully in yet, but both have broken through the gum. He also went to the mall for the first time today, and really, he took it pretty well. We bought him five new 6-9 month sized outfits (since he's starting to outgrow his 3-6 month ones), but he still doesn't have anything that seems like it's much of an Easter outfit.
I was surprised to hear the other day that Penelope Cruz was put on a "Best Dressed" Oscar list. That dress of hers was... something. And not in a good way. It looked like a whole lot of chickens had to die to make her skirt. Of course, from what I saw of the Oscars (which was most of it), it seemed like it was the Year of the Skirt. There were lots of pastel colors, and lots of trains, flowing fabrics and general big, fluffy, fairy-tale-princess-type skirts. Even little Abigail Breslin looked like she might have been wearing a hoop skirt of sorts.
Speaking of princess-like dresses, have any of you seen this article or something like it? On the one hand, I think this is a great idea and will probably bring Disney a lot of revenues. Heck, I wish I could afford one of the gowns for a wedding of my own ($1000-3000 is a bit pricey, though, I think)! Of course, if might be nice to know what they look like first--I haven't yet been able to find dresses for sure labeled as the Disney Princess wedding gowns. But, a few things about the linked article bugged me. For one thing, they mention the original Cinderella attire as being bright blue. This has bugged me for AGES, because in the original film (I've not seen either of the sequels), Cinderella's ball gown is NOT blue. It is white. Completely, purely WHITE. It only appears bluish because all the scenes in which it appears are nighttime ones. Thank you.
The next thing that annoys me is that the dresses are only based on the Disney Princess Six (Snow White, Cinderella, Princess Aurora, Ariel, Belle and Jasmine). Nevermind the fact that Princess Eilonwy (from The Black Cauldron) never gets anything resembling a nod for this. Pocahontas, Princess Tiger-Lily, Megara (an unofficially-confirmed princess, but who is one from a mythological perspective, especially since her signature color is purple) and Maid Marian (not a princess, but a noblewoman, though the "anthropomorphic fox" bit might make a difference...) are also overlooked. Heck, Mulan and Tinkerbell are given billing over these more worthy royal heroines--and that ain't right in my book. *shakes fist*
I am also concerned over the descriptions given for the sorts of gowns as inspired by their heroines. Now, Cinderella being "classic glamour" I can buy, not only because of all the stereotypical Cinderella trappings, but also because, based on the costume design in the film, I would estimate the movie's time period as being somewhere around the early Victorian era--and the Victorians are behind the current idea of a traditional wedding gown: a big white dress you only wear once. Same goes with Snow White being "sweet elegance," as it fits not only her character portrayal, but the overall feel of the movie as well: a sweetly simplified early Renaissance styling of costume. But, Ariel having "sultry allure" and Jasmine being "Bohemian chic," that bothers me. Personally, I think that "sultry allure" ought to be attributed to Jasmine, not Ariel, because when it comes to overt sexuality in a Disney heroine, there are only three girls who really fit the bill: Jasmine, Esmerelda and Megara. Except for maybe two seconds on screen, Ariel doesn't do seductive. She's all Daddy's-little-girl and surprisingly naive (partly due to the fact that at age sixteen, she's one of the younger Princesses, along with Aurora at the same age and Snow White, who's probably about that if not a little bit younger. Jasmine, meanwhile, is a few days shy of turning eighteen in the original film, Cinderella is probably near that and Belle may even be a little bit older than that). And then when you factor in her blue dress with the giant hairbow and her own wedding gown with those big mutton sleeves... No, I don't buy "sultry allure" when it comes to Ariel. If she's "comfortable showing her body" it's due to the hydrodynamic fact that clothing is not practical in an aqueous environment and she doesn't know any better. That sort of mood should go to Jasmine, who not only briefly attempts to seduce the villain, but also has less of an excuse when it comes to showing skin (the desert environment only goes so far, particularly considering that modern Arabian women tend to be fully-covered-up). As for "bohemian chic," that sounds much more like Esmerelda than Jasmine, even if Jasmine's wedding gown from the third film would fit into the sheaths and lace motif. The designer claims to have spent a lot of hours watching the films and trying to capture the "modern-day mood" of each Princess, but with Ariel and Jasmine, she might have missed her mark--I'd have to see their respective gowns to say for certain.
There are no descriptions provided for the Belle and Aurora gowns, but I imagine Aurora being somewhere between Cinderella and Snow White, due not only to character (which is similarly dreamy and naive, and in fact relatively bland compared to some of the other firecracker heroines--Prince Philip shows more personality than she does), but also to being of a similar time period (what is it Prince Philip says? It's the fourteenth century? It's been a while since I watched it). As for Belle... While her film era strikes me as somewhere in the early-to-mid-eighteenth century, she's very much a forward-thinking, liberated heroine, so I imagine there would be a more modern and practical feel to her gowns, maybe some more non-traditional types, like a wedding suit or something. We really don't see her canon wedding dress, unless it's supposed to be the one at the very end of the original film, which it may well be because in the 1700s, white wasn't a traditional gown color--a bride got married in the best dress she had, and if a new one was made for her, it could be in whatever color she wanted.
But, anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter. Either way, I want to see these gown designs once they're available!
Check out my Dark Ages Lady profile!
Check out my Dark Ages Viking profile!
Check out my Dark Ages Nun profile!
Check out my Dark Ages Peasant profile!
Okay! Well, the last few days have been something. Thursday, Adrian had oatmeal for the first time. He seems to like it about as well as he does rice cereal. On Friday, he had carrots for the first time. I don't think he liked them as well as squash or sweet potatoes. When I put the first spoonful in his mouth, he looked at me as if he were going to cry! XD He didn't cry, but he DID cut his first tooth! Today he cut his second. Both are the bottom incisors, with his right one followed by the left. They aren't fully in yet, but both have broken through the gum. He also went to the mall for the first time today, and really, he took it pretty well. We bought him five new 6-9 month sized outfits (since he's starting to outgrow his 3-6 month ones), but he still doesn't have anything that seems like it's much of an Easter outfit.
I was surprised to hear the other day that Penelope Cruz was put on a "Best Dressed" Oscar list. That dress of hers was... something. And not in a good way. It looked like a whole lot of chickens had to die to make her skirt. Of course, from what I saw of the Oscars (which was most of it), it seemed like it was the Year of the Skirt. There were lots of pastel colors, and lots of trains, flowing fabrics and general big, fluffy, fairy-tale-princess-type skirts. Even little Abigail Breslin looked like she might have been wearing a hoop skirt of sorts.
Speaking of princess-like dresses, have any of you seen this article or something like it? On the one hand, I think this is a great idea and will probably bring Disney a lot of revenues. Heck, I wish I could afford one of the gowns for a wedding of my own ($1000-3000 is a bit pricey, though, I think)! Of course, if might be nice to know what they look like first--I haven't yet been able to find dresses for sure labeled as the Disney Princess wedding gowns. But, a few things about the linked article bugged me. For one thing, they mention the original Cinderella attire as being bright blue. This has bugged me for AGES, because in the original film (I've not seen either of the sequels), Cinderella's ball gown is NOT blue. It is white. Completely, purely WHITE. It only appears bluish because all the scenes in which it appears are nighttime ones. Thank you.
The next thing that annoys me is that the dresses are only based on the Disney Princess Six (Snow White, Cinderella, Princess Aurora, Ariel, Belle and Jasmine). Nevermind the fact that Princess Eilonwy (from The Black Cauldron) never gets anything resembling a nod for this. Pocahontas, Princess Tiger-Lily, Megara (an unofficially-confirmed princess, but who is one from a mythological perspective, especially since her signature color is purple) and Maid Marian (not a princess, but a noblewoman, though the "anthropomorphic fox" bit might make a difference...) are also overlooked. Heck, Mulan and Tinkerbell are given billing over these more worthy royal heroines--and that ain't right in my book. *shakes fist*
I am also concerned over the descriptions given for the sorts of gowns as inspired by their heroines. Now, Cinderella being "classic glamour" I can buy, not only because of all the stereotypical Cinderella trappings, but also because, based on the costume design in the film, I would estimate the movie's time period as being somewhere around the early Victorian era--and the Victorians are behind the current idea of a traditional wedding gown: a big white dress you only wear once. Same goes with Snow White being "sweet elegance," as it fits not only her character portrayal, but the overall feel of the movie as well: a sweetly simplified early Renaissance styling of costume. But, Ariel having "sultry allure" and Jasmine being "Bohemian chic," that bothers me. Personally, I think that "sultry allure" ought to be attributed to Jasmine, not Ariel, because when it comes to overt sexuality in a Disney heroine, there are only three girls who really fit the bill: Jasmine, Esmerelda and Megara. Except for maybe two seconds on screen, Ariel doesn't do seductive. She's all Daddy's-little-girl and surprisingly naive (partly due to the fact that at age sixteen, she's one of the younger Princesses, along with Aurora at the same age and Snow White, who's probably about that if not a little bit younger. Jasmine, meanwhile, is a few days shy of turning eighteen in the original film, Cinderella is probably near that and Belle may even be a little bit older than that). And then when you factor in her blue dress with the giant hairbow and her own wedding gown with those big mutton sleeves... No, I don't buy "sultry allure" when it comes to Ariel. If she's "comfortable showing her body" it's due to the hydrodynamic fact that clothing is not practical in an aqueous environment and she doesn't know any better. That sort of mood should go to Jasmine, who not only briefly attempts to seduce the villain, but also has less of an excuse when it comes to showing skin (the desert environment only goes so far, particularly considering that modern Arabian women tend to be fully-covered-up). As for "bohemian chic," that sounds much more like Esmerelda than Jasmine, even if Jasmine's wedding gown from the third film would fit into the sheaths and lace motif. The designer claims to have spent a lot of hours watching the films and trying to capture the "modern-day mood" of each Princess, but with Ariel and Jasmine, she might have missed her mark--I'd have to see their respective gowns to say for certain.
There are no descriptions provided for the Belle and Aurora gowns, but I imagine Aurora being somewhere between Cinderella and Snow White, due not only to character (which is similarly dreamy and naive, and in fact relatively bland compared to some of the other firecracker heroines--Prince Philip shows more personality than she does), but also to being of a similar time period (what is it Prince Philip says? It's the fourteenth century? It's been a while since I watched it). As for Belle... While her film era strikes me as somewhere in the early-to-mid-eighteenth century, she's very much a forward-thinking, liberated heroine, so I imagine there would be a more modern and practical feel to her gowns, maybe some more non-traditional types, like a wedding suit or something. We really don't see her canon wedding dress, unless it's supposed to be the one at the very end of the original film, which it may well be because in the 1700s, white wasn't a traditional gown color--a bride got married in the best dress she had, and if a new one was made for her, it could be in whatever color she wanted.
But, anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter. Either way, I want to see these gown designs once they're available!