FA+
Shop
959
Views
Views
63
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 605 x 806
File Size 103.9 kB
Report this content
More from Saara
This might well have been the first piece that I ever digitally coloured. It was done at Steve Martin's place, around 1997 I guess. (The b/w art is a little older.) I didn't know the first thing about Photoshop at the time and found the learning curve almost vertical. "Steve, how do you do this again? How do I change that? Where the hell is... " Until you know how to do about 50 things, you can't do *anything* with Photoshop. In any case, I pulled it off, and probably couldn't do much better today. The only difference is that I would have used black for shading, not the dodge-tool.
Dixie is a character I invented in the early 90s for a comic. She was supposed to have disguised her sex so that she could join the Confederate army, and stay with her boyfriend. Unfortunately, they got send to separate units in different parts of the south, to fight different Union armies. It was more humorous than a serious story, but had it's grim moments. The comic was written, and I even draw the cover and first page. Then... for some reason I just stalled. It would be nice to complete someday, but all I could do with it is give it away on-line, and I frankly don't feel like knocking myself out for nothing. Even if I found a publisher, the 500 copies it might sell would amount to just about nothing in profits.
I'm afraid I'm very much of the school that if the world can't pay for my creativity, it can bloody well do without it. (See "Atlas Shrugged".) However, there's thousands of talented artists who are eager to give it all away, so the world won't suffer much...
Dixie is a character I invented in the early 90s for a comic. She was supposed to have disguised her sex so that she could join the Confederate army, and stay with her boyfriend. Unfortunately, they got send to separate units in different parts of the south, to fight different Union armies. It was more humorous than a serious story, but had it's grim moments. The comic was written, and I even draw the cover and first page. Then... for some reason I just stalled. It would be nice to complete someday, but all I could do with it is give it away on-line, and I frankly don't feel like knocking myself out for nothing. Even if I found a publisher, the 500 copies it might sell would amount to just about nothing in profits.
I'm afraid I'm very much of the school that if the world can't pay for my creativity, it can bloody well do without it. (See "Atlas Shrugged".) However, there's thousands of talented artists who are eager to give it all away, so the world won't suffer much...
Category All / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 605 x 806px
File Size 103.9 kB
I'm a staunch abolitionist, but have never been keen on the cause of Union, actually. If the South wanted to go its own way, that was okay with me. It was the reasons they wanted to go their own way that I have issues with.
I've been fascinated with Civil War history since I was ten or eleven, and collected the whole set of Civil War News bubble-gum cards. I managed to acquire another set only last year, and own a number of genuine Confederate banknotes. And a few genuine mini-balls. I drew a line at picking up random shin bones at Gettysberg, the two times I visited...
I've been fascinated with Civil War history since I was ten or eleven, and collected the whole set of Civil War News bubble-gum cards. I managed to acquire another set only last year, and own a number of genuine Confederate banknotes. And a few genuine mini-balls. I drew a line at picking up random shin bones at Gettysberg, the two times I visited...
Well we all know that that British Empire (which at the time Canada was a part of) abolished slavery decades before the United States (although this did not stop them from secretly adding the Confederacy and even considering an alliance with them) Would this have meant that if there had not been a Revolutionary war or if the Patriots had lost, Slavery would have been abolished in North America even sooner? Also Saara, I'm not a dummy, I know that slavery is the elephant in the room that can't be ignored when discussing the American Civil War. I basic see it like this:By today's standards Both sides were just as racist and bigoted, the only difference was that the south needed slavery for its economy to function, the north did not. Mr. Lincoln knew that by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation it would: undermine the south's war effort and discredit them to other counties that might add them, not hurt the north's economy since it was not slave based and slaves in the union would be unaffected anyway, and finally win the support of abolitionists to boot.
One more thing I wish to add, I think demonetization of the average Confederate solider is absolutely wrong. I think slavery would have been one of the last things on his mind. He was fighting because his home was being invaded, the politics behind it meant nothing to him.
One more thing I wish to add, I think demonetization of the average Confederate solider is absolutely wrong. I think slavery would have been one of the last things on his mind. He was fighting because his home was being invaded, the politics behind it meant nothing to him.
I know a fair amount about the mind-set of the average Confederate soldier to realize he was fighting for what he thought was the defense of his home. Most did not own slaves. Many did not even like the institution very much, because it demeaned and cheapened labour. Much of the Soutron's dislike of the industrialized north was that he had been conditioned to think of working for another man as beneath him, a "nigger" work. Unfortunatley, these attitudes also retarded the development of the south. Bukt for decades the north had been demonized to most southerners, by the wealthy planter class, who had everthing to gain by slavery and isolating the south from northern thinking. Listening to southerners from the 1850s talk about the north, you'd think they were talking about the Red Menance, or the Taliban. Abolitionist hated the south, but most of the south hated the entire north -- irrationally.
But the north didn't love the black man either. Most simply had little exposure to them, and the few exceptions didn't present a threat. After the Civil War, when large numbers of blacks migrated north, racism began to rear its ugly head there too. But the issue is complicated by several things. One of them is the Irish, who hated the blacks because they would work even cheaper than the Irish. Another is the migration of Southern WHITES to the midwest and west, who brought antebellum sentiments with them. Another complication is the rise of the fake science of "social Darwinism" in the 1880s and '90s, which "validated" racist ideas. The matter of racism in the north actually grew worse as the century grew older. The nadir of it was actually 1890 to the 1930s. Most of the Jim Crow laws are only that old. Then too, schemes in the old south used corrupt courts and law enforcement to continue to exploit blacks long after they were technically free. And then the KKK -- which at one time extended it's membership all the way into Canada, though it was never very influential here.
The British upper class was mainly sympathetic to the south. There was a British colonel at Robert E. Lee's side at Gettysberg, observing the Confederate Army. If White Hall could have, it would have sided openly with the Confederacy. While the British detested slavery, they sympathized instinctively with the aristocratic style of the Planter class. However, the country would have risen against the government had White Hall gone over the south. Most working class Brits not only hated slavery -- and were willing to suffer unemployment in support of the Union blockade of cotton -- the also hated "toffs" on principle.
It has to be kept in mind that many southerners also hated toffs. Most of those who had been driven off their lands through debt and moved into the hills detested the slave system that build the giant plantations. Many counties in the hills were in open revolt agains the Confederacy. A recent book I read on "the Kingdom of Jones" was fascinating. And, of course, we have a state of West Viginian because it openly succeeded from succession.
But the north didn't love the black man either. Most simply had little exposure to them, and the few exceptions didn't present a threat. After the Civil War, when large numbers of blacks migrated north, racism began to rear its ugly head there too. But the issue is complicated by several things. One of them is the Irish, who hated the blacks because they would work even cheaper than the Irish. Another is the migration of Southern WHITES to the midwest and west, who brought antebellum sentiments with them. Another complication is the rise of the fake science of "social Darwinism" in the 1880s and '90s, which "validated" racist ideas. The matter of racism in the north actually grew worse as the century grew older. The nadir of it was actually 1890 to the 1930s. Most of the Jim Crow laws are only that old. Then too, schemes in the old south used corrupt courts and law enforcement to continue to exploit blacks long after they were technically free. And then the KKK -- which at one time extended it's membership all the way into Canada, though it was never very influential here.
The British upper class was mainly sympathetic to the south. There was a British colonel at Robert E. Lee's side at Gettysberg, observing the Confederate Army. If White Hall could have, it would have sided openly with the Confederacy. While the British detested slavery, they sympathized instinctively with the aristocratic style of the Planter class. However, the country would have risen against the government had White Hall gone over the south. Most working class Brits not only hated slavery -- and were willing to suffer unemployment in support of the Union blockade of cotton -- the also hated "toffs" on principle.
It has to be kept in mind that many southerners also hated toffs. Most of those who had been driven off their lands through debt and moved into the hills detested the slave system that build the giant plantations. Many counties in the hills were in open revolt agains the Confederacy. A recent book I read on "the Kingdom of Jones" was fascinating. And, of course, we have a state of West Viginian because it openly succeeded from succession.
I'm speaking of my prejudices and whether they're come by through ignorance or not. Not commenting on anyone else.
I don't think anything you've said has given me any clear idea where you're coming from or why -- just that you don't like critcism of the South. Whether all you know about the Civil War was fron watching Ken Burns, or whether you're a noted academic author on the subject of Antebellum mines & industry, I have no idea.
I don't think anything you've said has given me any clear idea where you're coming from or why -- just that you don't like critcism of the South. Whether all you know about the Civil War was fron watching Ken Burns, or whether you're a noted academic author on the subject of Antebellum mines & industry, I have no idea.
An extraterrestrial who was first to stumble onto our planet in 1970. She comes from a civilization of 21 other sentient speices, of which hers is about the most technically sophisticated. Their presence on Earth has no purpose, as such. They aren't here to teach us anything, led us away from Capitalism or Marxism, to bring us to the worship of their God, or anything like that. Though, gradually, concerns that we'd blow ourselves up or overpopulate ourselves off the planet have led to a certain amount of interventionism.
"No, I'm sorry, you can't have your nukes back... "
Tangel is another sort of XT -- different species from Saara.
Neither is a funny animal or morph in any sense.
"No, I'm sorry, you can't have your nukes back... "
Tangel is another sort of XT -- different species from Saara.
Neither is a funny animal or morph in any sense.
Tall order to describe a personality in a few words.
Um... tolerant. Otherwise I doubt she could spend five minutes here. At the same time very clear on issues of right and wrong, fairness and injustice. Not impressed by status or wealth. After all, how important is it to be king or president of a buch of planet-bound savages? Smart, but careful not to show-off. Fun but not trivial.
Um... tolerant. Otherwise I doubt she could spend five minutes here. At the same time very clear on issues of right and wrong, fairness and injustice. Not impressed by status or wealth. After all, how important is it to be king or president of a buch of planet-bound savages? Smart, but careful not to show-off. Fun but not trivial.
I bought one LED flasahlight, called UltraFire a couple of weeks ago. But it's so powerful, it's more like several regular ones. Review of UltraFire flashlight.
Keep it factual and I don't think anyone will complain. On the other hand, beefy, good-looking, blonde, blue-eyed Southrons marching over the corpses of scrawny, Jewish/Eastern European looking northerners will likely be regarded as propaganda. Donna Barr's "Desert Peach" is a perfect model to avoid imitating.
LOL. Well obviously, but I am just talking cute pinup style artwork, nothing so "political". Last image I did sporting such a flag, was this one.
I know, but from what I heard, before this song was put on recording (a good century later) it was based on a real Civil War time song that the Confederates would sing to boost morale. The reason why being because the war of 1812/Battle of New Orleans period was one of the better victories of the southern region after the revolution. And it's also the reason why all the harder fighters in this country always come from below the Dixie line. We've been saving this country's ass since the time of King George. Hence, when them yankees were giving us grief, we gave 'em hell.
...I think i said too much.
Seems I'm more like my mother than I thought.
...I think i said too much.
Seems I'm more like my mother than I thought.
Besides, true southerners call everybody and anything that touches the Dixie line, starting from Texas, the South-WEST. 'Course them cowboys, just like you said, are too pig-headed to admit that they're not official members of the "Land of cotton and Tea" club.
And barely a bucketful of them are directly descended from true southerners anyway. Most of them are descended from the folks who migrated to America during or after the time of the civil war.
...A lot of Dutch, man....lottadutch. And not as much Irish or British folks as you'd think.
And barely a bucketful of them are directly descended from true southerners anyway. Most of them are descended from the folks who migrated to America during or after the time of the civil war.
...A lot of Dutch, man....lottadutch. And not as much Irish or British folks as you'd think.
I suppose that could be so. It would be rather characteristic, too, that the Battle of New Orleans took place two weeks after the peace treaty that ended the war, so was absolutely pointless. The victory won nothing. I've always thought it was too bad the British didn't land troops behind the American position and take the line from both sides. It might have kept Jackson out of the White House.
There's only one reason for human beings to live in a sweat-box like the South East -- agriculture. The South Eastern US is the natural garden of North America, where you can grow three crops of almost anything every year.
The only reason so much agriculture is carried out in California is because taxpayer money subsidizes imported water from elsewhere. California had the cheap land and the sun... but too little water. Solution? Take it from people without the political clout or will to protect it -- the north of the state, mainly. (But schemes have been proposed to divert water from as far away as the Canadian Rockies.)
In any case, irrigation is rapidly turning much of California's semi-arable land back into salty deserts. I suspect its only a matter of time before the fruits and produce of the South East will once again dominate North American supermarkets.
There was another reason why peopled lived in the old south -- coal and iron. For a period, the Southern Apalachians were an industrial growth area. Before that... plantation crops. But most of the people who lived on plantations had no say in the matter.
The only reason so much agriculture is carried out in California is because taxpayer money subsidizes imported water from elsewhere. California had the cheap land and the sun... but too little water. Solution? Take it from people without the political clout or will to protect it -- the north of the state, mainly. (But schemes have been proposed to divert water from as far away as the Canadian Rockies.)
In any case, irrigation is rapidly turning much of California's semi-arable land back into salty deserts. I suspect its only a matter of time before the fruits and produce of the South East will once again dominate North American supermarkets.
There was another reason why peopled lived in the old south -- coal and iron. For a period, the Southern Apalachians were an industrial growth area. Before that... plantation crops. But most of the people who lived on plantations had no say in the matter.
Ah... a rhetorical question! In that case, no. Ther's no reason anyone would live in rural Georgia, Alabama or Mississippi. Yet many people do, from choice even. They say inexplicable things like, they "enjoy the countryside," and "love the friendly people." Personally, countryside can be nice, but on occasion where I've been forced to spend too much time in it, I get bored rapidly. And people may be less friendly in a big city -- or so some people claim -- but I find them more interesting.
If I had my choice of countryside, I'd pick Nevada or Arizona over Alabama anyday. I like to see the planet I'm standing on, not the tree cover.
If I had my choice of countryside, I'd pick Nevada or Arizona over Alabama anyday. I like to see the planet I'm standing on, not the tree cover.
Arizona isnt too bad. it doesnt have violent weather or earthquakes.its biggest problem is drought.also the southern half is very hot.phoenix is lovely from Nov-March but awful dry yes but still awful hot the rest.Flagstaff up north in Arizona is rather lovely.Not much affordable housing up there though.
With air conditioning you can live on the surface of Mercury...
But I agree with you about outdoors -- the SW can be murder. Since all the rednecks, gun totters, and tea-baggers love cheap real estate and sun, they've been moving to the SW in huge numbers. There is no water to support them. A century from now I think most of the American SW will be dotted with the ruins of early 21st. century cities, abandoned when the water ran out.
In the meantime, that's why it's getting expensive. You could still probably find a few acres of some parched desert somewhere, 75 or 100 miles from Tucson, but you pay for cheap land in other ways. Mainly isolation.
But I agree with you about outdoors -- the SW can be murder. Since all the rednecks, gun totters, and tea-baggers love cheap real estate and sun, they've been moving to the SW in huge numbers. There is no water to support them. A century from now I think most of the American SW will be dotted with the ruins of early 21st. century cities, abandoned when the water ran out.
In the meantime, that's why it's getting expensive. You could still probably find a few acres of some parched desert somewhere, 75 or 100 miles from Tucson, but you pay for cheap land in other ways. Mainly isolation.
oh definitely.If it wasnt for ac I would never live in the Phoenix area. yes maybe over time especially with warming climate the northern usa would become more popular again.I grew up in Pittsburgh and I find the vast tree covered areas and gentle hills and rivers really more pleasant then the arid southwest.I enjoy going back to see family when I go to Anthrocon each year since it moved there.
Comments