The Agony Component.

[Barbaria1]

Co-Ed Crux. Four by Jastrow, two by Jerkbot, and a WIP, I’m not sure by whom.

Seems the crucified males all find themselves excited ... things could be worse, they’re thinking?

 

[Apostate]

Seems the crucified males all find themselves excited ... things could be worse, they’re thinking?

I think the erection-on-the-cross trope comes from the thing about hanged men and hard-ons, and I’m not at all sure the analogy holds up.

 

[Apostate]

A few days ago Messaline inserted herself into a line of crucified rebel gladiators along the Appian Way.

Rather fetchingly, I should say.

 

[Frank Petrexa]

Or maybe that line from Detective Dietrich on the last episode of "Barney Miller".
"Last day. Gotta use 'em up."

 

[Apostate]

Have been browsing back through Jastrow's oeuvre, and found several HOLY SHIT!!! renders old and new.

 

[Cruxkilla]

Thoughts?

 

[Apostate]

Thoughts?

As a talent free crux consumer I can’t comment on artistic techniques. I can say this looks like a good start in terms of this thread’s themes.

 

[Apostate]

I never have warmed to Baurong's style. But he’s an artist that gets this kink.

 

[Cruxkilla]

Made these of my aunt.how did I do with the agony?

 

[Apostate]

Made these of my aunt.how did I do with the agony?

Just fine.

You can use some tips on Photoshop that I can’t give you, and the family dynamics between you and your aunt must be . . . interesting.

Overall, if this is your first stab at this sort of thing, not bad.

 

[Cruxkilla]

Sure what tips

 

[Apostate]

Sure what tips

Haven’t run across that turn of phrase before. No matter.

And in future, if you can, credit your source material. The ones above are by Makar and Damian.

 

[Migoz2]

There is certainly something 'theatrical' about the culture of Rome, at least in the so-called 'Golden Age', that is both attractive and repellent, it's not just the Hollywood version though of course it makes for great cinema, but they really did revel in spectacle - Imperial progresses, Generals' triumphs, gladiatorial contest, chariot races, exotic beasts ... life was cheap - literally so in the ever-stocked slave markets - death in many forms ever near, and - horrible to think it - but putting people to death in spectacular ways really does seem to have been an art form, like everything else they did, they made sure to do it bigger, better and more efficiently.

There have been comparable eras, at least to some extent, in Europe from the Black Death through the Renaissance, Reformation and beyond both the general 'theatricality' (and Puritan reactions against it), and in particular public executions - burnings, hangings, etc. - went on through what in other senses were 'golden ages'. I think parallels can be found in Chinese history too, I don't know much about that.

As to the barbarians, of course we've only got Classical writers tending either to give shock-horror accounts of their brutality or present them as models of the noble savage, the truth was probably neither and both. It's interesting too to reflect on how these eras of spectacular cruelty begin with loss of faith in the more ordered - though actually or symbolically bloody - rituals of sacrificial religions, and may be followed by a return to the theatre of religious ritual.

What all this says about the age we're living in now is a troubling question ....

Eulalia, you remind me of a article

http://godawa.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Coleman-Fatal-Charades-Roman-Executions-Staged-as-Mythological-Enactments.pdf

which is a scholarly paper, written in densest academse, and peppered with untranslated Latin and Greek. But it describes in some detail the reasons for and methods of executing criminals as part of public entertainments.

Dramas in which characters die bloodily and horribly are commonplace today, we call them slasher movies. There are also compilation videos of people actually getting killed. When actors are deliberately killed to make Friday 13th movies, then I’ll start getting worried about the current version of civilization.

Thanks for that, Apostate - yes it is a rather heavy, plodding survey of Roman punishments and executions, especially ones conducted as theatrical spectacles, but it's well-organised and argued, it certainly illustrates my point. Most of the Latin (and a little Greek) in the text is translated, except some short phrases, and where some writing has been summarised in the text, the original is given in full in footnotes. This passage (one of those ?you've higlighted) gives a taste:

[A] Pompeian inscription, CIL iv 9983a, ... includes a line advertising
criminals to be crucified in the amphitheatre during the regular munus: 'cruciarii
ven[atio] et vel[a] er[unt]'. An advantage of this attraction is that it does not
require prisoners to be trained. Crucifixion, however, involving a lingering death
that lasts hours if not days,does not offer the same spectacular appeal as the other
'aggravated' death penalties that were commonly imposed: burning and beasts. But
the actual moment of death may be relatively insignificant in relation to the
satisfaction spectators derived from witnessing preliminaries that culminated in the
hoisting of the body onto the cross. It is also possible that a combined penalty was
envisaged such as that suffered by the martyr Blandina, who was hung on a post as
bait for the animals in a posture that is explicitly likened to crucifixion.
Similarly the martyrdom of Pionius, who was nailed to a [xylon = wooden post],
raised, and burnt, combined crucifixion and crematio.'
As well as intensifying the punishment by doubling the pain, these
variations sustain interest by their novelty


That, typically rather humorless, line makes me imagine a board meeting
where the Emperor and his advisers are discussing more cost-efficient ways
of killing off people in public in ways that will please the punters!

I have been mulling this over for the last ten days, and waiting for a space when I could get to grips with that article (thanks @Apostate for the link). He does a fairly good job of setting the context for the how and what, but doesn't really provide sufficient analysis (for me) of the why. Why did the Romans take public execution to such levels when the Egyptians, Persians and Greeks didn't? (And his use of the scapegoat explanation has been superceded by Giorgio Agamben in almost every way.)

I find myself in agreement with most of what I have quoted above. There is something incredibly performative about this level of cruelty, certainly in the Roman era, but also in the late Middle Ages, through to the Industrial Revolution (I know, it's a contested phrase now!). I take your point, @Eulalia about the way the latter example coincides with the challenge to religious hierarchies that was the Reformation, but I don't think that applies to the Golden Age of Rome. I am not convinced that the ruling class of Rome, let alone the general populace believed themselves to be under threat from Christianity, and were they moving away from the 'ordered rituals of sacrificial religion'? Had that not happened earlier, at about the same time as the establishment of the Republic?

I am more and more thinking about the link between extreme, organised violence and the advance and maintenance of Empire. As you say, Eulalia, life is held extremely cheaply at such times, specifically, the lives of the inhabitants of the conquered territories. And I agree entirely about the disturbing resonances with the present day.

Two further thoughts: your imagining of the board meeting about cost-efficiency actually (whilst entirely inappropriate for the Roman empire) does tie in to people like Eichmann and the hideous bureaucratisation of the processes of the Holocaust (Arendt's 'banality of evil').

And, @Apostate 's point about the modern taste for watching death is, I would say, valid with regard to people seeking out, watching and sharing real death, and it fits this model, but I would suggest that nobody watches violent films (even gruesome ones like Saw ) and believes for one second that anyone is coming to harm. I agree these dramas appeal to something dark in the human psyche, but is it the same mechanism that makes people enjoy real violent death? (I would say that the Greek concept of catharsis works better there.)

 

[phlebas]

Sure what tips

There's not a lot wrong. The faces are at the right angles and fit pretty well, some more colour adjustment would be good. The first one looks a little like a mask, the lines between the new face and the original figure are too noticeable. There are ways to deal with that, ie blurring or feathering the edge of the new face where it meets the old one. Generally pretty good and very pleasing results for you I imagine, seeing your aunt on the wood.

 

[Roberta]

Made these of my aunt.how did I do with the agony?

Loving #1, imagining a geeky woman exploring her fantasy.

 

[Apostate]

Fat slave girl posted her elsewhere, and although this isn’t a crux pic, she’s just too intense to pass up.

 

[Apostate]

And, @Apostate 's point about the modern taste for watching death is, I would say, valid with regard to people seeking out, watching and sharing real death, and it fits this model, but I would suggest that nobody watches violent films (even gruesome ones like Saw ) and believes for one second that anyone is coming to harm. I agree these dramas appeal to something dark in the human psyche, but is it the same mechanism that makes people enjoy real violent death? (I would say that the Greek concept of catharsis works better there.)

Have been mulling this one over, and thinking that the hallmark of successful film storytelling (or any kind of storytelling) lies in the suspension of disbelief. The audience knows that nobody’s actually dying, and the dismemberments are special effects, but for the time they’re caught up in the narrative it’s real.

I also find it interesting that this was among the earliest motion pictures.

 

[Migoz2]

Have been mulling this one over, and thinking that the hallmark of successful film storytelling (or any kind of storytelling) lies in the suspension of disbelief. The audience knows that nobody’s actually dying, and the dismemberments are special effects, but for the time they’re caught up in the narrative it’s real.

I also find it interesting that this was among the earliest motion pictures.

I agree entirely about the suspension of disbelief. And about the power of the narrative.

I have never seen that before - it's fascinating! Film from 124 years ago!

 

[Eva Inanna]

Have been mulling this one over, and thinking that the hallmark of successful film storytelling (or any kind of storytelling) lies in the suspension of disbelief. The audience knows that nobody’s actually dying, and the dismemberments are special effects, but for the time they’re caught up in the narrative it’s real.

The executioner botched it requiring three stroke to separate the head from the body.

 

[Migoz2]

The executioner botched it requiring three stroke to separate the head from the body.

I used to know someone who got off on that fact