--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > This is the most spectacularly well-done, most beautiful, most > > > imaginative, most uplifting video I've ever seen. > > > > > > YouTube: > > > http://tinyurl.com/2r73ay > > > > > Thanks for sharing this- it is an amazing piece and must have taken > > quite a while to compile. I was trying to figure out if the > sequence > > was purely historical. Close but probably not exactly. Really liked > > it!:-) > > It's only *very* roughly chronological. It covers > about 500 years. The first half covers the first > 250 years or so, but it goes back and forth in time > over that period. The second half goes back and forth > too, but it's a little closer to being in historical > order.
That was my general sense- the moving within roughly defined periods. > I just watched it again, and this time I noticed > something kind of sad: even in the second half, > there aren't any paintings of women of color. Maybe > a couple are, but they aren't obviously so. There > are plenty the creator of the video could have > chosen from. > eh- probably would've been a little jarring to morph that way. we'll save that for Gaugin (sp?) version...
