Tuesday, September 20, 2022

Queen Elizabeth: A Visual Dictionary - The New York Times - Dictionary

Over her seven decades on the throne, Queen Elizabeth II understood the power of visuals. The first British monarch to have a televised coronation, she watched the world turn its attention from the radio to the TV set, and by the time she died this month at 96, having celebrated her Platinum Jubilee just a few months earlier, she — well, the royal family — had an Instagram account and a YouTube channel.

As she presided over a shrinking empire, projecting stability and continuity was arguably her most essential job as sovereign. From her hairstyle to her handbags, her kerchiefs to her corgis, her pearls to her profile, every visual signifier was a means of communication for a monarch who famously had little to say — at least in public. Here’s a look at the symbols Elizabeth leveraged during her historic reign, and what she used them to say.


Her hair

Dan Kitwood/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Queen Elizabeth II was nothing if not steadfast in her devotion to her country and the style in which she chose to express it, but of all the consistent imagery she created throughout her long life, her carefully sculpted hairstyle might have been the most reliable of all.

From the time she was a girl pictured in black and white on the lawn through her stint in the Auxiliary Territorial Service and then her marriage, coronation and 70 years of rule, through decades of bobs, bouffants, hippie hair and helmet heads, it never really changed: an inch or two shorter or longer here, maybe; slightly more bouffant there; allowed to go white in the 1990s, sure. But otherwise her ’do — chin-length, brushed back at the crown, set in soft curls at either temple and framing her jawline — was the visual equivalent of death and taxes: a rock of reliability in an uncertain world. And like so much about the queen, it was a highly considered choice.

Perfectly and deliberately symmetrical, so that she looked the same from either side and in every portrait; molded to fit snugly under a crown or one of her many hats and scarves, her coif was tended to for over two decades by the hairdresser Ian Carmichael, who visited Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle twice a week until the coronavirus pandemic (when Angela Kelly, the queen’s personal assistant and senior dresser, took over) to make sure there was not a strand out of place. That was just how she rolled.

— Vanessa Friedman


Her handbags

Tim Graham Photo Library, via Getty Images

“She told me she never felt dressed without her bag,” Gerald Bodmer said of Queen Elizabeth II. Mr. Bodmer, 90, is the chief executive of Launer, a British manufacturer of luxury leather goods favored by the queen for her most ever-present accessories: her handbags. (According to Town & Country, her first Launer bag was a gift from her mother decades ago.)

The bags were sturdy, unflashy and constant to an almost metaphorical degree. One of her favorites, Mr. Bodmer said, was the Traviata, a trapezoidal bag made of suede-lined calfskin with a single top strap; the queen sported it in both black leather and the slightly more fanciful black patent leather. It retails for about $2,800. She crashed the Launer website after carrying a cream-colored Lisa — a boxier handbag with two straps — at the 2011 wedding of William and Catherine, now the Prince and Princess of Wales.

The queen was also known for customizing the bags to her liking, preferring longer-than-standard straps. In recent years, Launer took steps to make them lighter for the queen, removing excess materials from the interior for easier carrying, Mr. Bodmer said. “Right to the end of her life, she was carrying a handbag, even when using a walking stick,” he said. “You can’t have a more loyal customer, can you?”

— Madison Malone Kircher


Her gloves

Bryn Lennon/Getty Images

Queen Elizabeth II was known for her restraint. She rarely showed excitement or worry (“Keep calm and carry on,” etc.). She also rarely showed her hands.

The queen almost always wore gloves in public, whether white dress gloves or black leather ones. She waved from balconies and carriages in them, and shook hands in private receiving lines and at public walkabouts with fully sheathed fingers.

“Gloves were a physical barrier between the queen and her subjects,” said Elizabeth Holmes, a journalist who has written widely about the royals. “They projected a certain separation between a monarch and the people.”

Amid a pandemic, it doesn’t seem like the worst idea, particularly when part of your job is to extend your hand to strangers so they can curtsy to you. But her gloves weren’t just a modern practicality — they were a commitment to the past, according to Tina Brown, author of “The Palace Papers.” “The queen came from an era where gloves were the norm, and they added a formal finish to everything she wore,” Ms. Brown said.

A notable break from the royal tradition of gloves came in 1987, when Diana, then the Princess of Wales, shook hands with AIDS patients without gloves. Diana’s bare skin became a symbol of humanity and compassion and offered a contrast to the remoteness conveyed by the gloved hand that the world was at that point extending to people with H.I.V.

— Katherine Rosman


Her pearls

From left, Chris Jackson/Getty Images, Associated Press, Paul Hackett/Reuters

Long before there was Instagram, there was Queen Elizabeth II, keeping a careful eye and a (usually) steady grip on the brand of her ancestors’ start-up, the Firm. She was, essentially, its chief influencer, and she seemed to know that consistent visuals were vital to building a brand identity.

One item that could reliably be seen framing the lower portion of an Elizabeth close-up (no filter necessary) was a pearl necklace — sometimes a double strand, but usually a triple. In portraits, on official state visits, after services at Westminster Abbey, the pearls were there: formal but not fancy, lustrous in glow but not ostentatious in sparkle.

When members of the royal family traveled to Buckingham Palace last week to receive the queen’s coffin as it arrived from Scotland, pearls emerged as an item of poignant homage. Cameras captured Catherine, the Princess of Wales, riding in a car toward the palace with a sad, tired gaze cast out the window and a triple-strand pearl necklace draped below her neck.

According to Elizabeth Holmes, author of “HRH: So Many Thoughts on Royal Style,” pearls are a way for anyone to honor the queen. “The pearls don’t have to be real, they don’t have to be expensive — you can do it, too,” she said. “I think we will see more of it.”

— Katherine Rosman


Her Land Rovers

Max Mumby/Indigo, via Getty Images

Peering over the wheel of a Land Rover, perhaps the make most closely associated with her reign, the queen offered a master class in loyalty to a quintessentially British brand as well as the occasional glimpse, through an untinted window, of her moments of independence.

While the queen’s official duties often kept her in prim pumps in the rear seat of a Daimler limousine, in her personal life she charted her own rugged excursions around the Sandringham and Balmoral Estates from the driver’s seat of a Land Rover Defender. The boxy utility vehicles, which have four-wheel drive and the ground clearance to crawl over rocks and ford streams, matched the unfussy capability of a monarch who trained in driving and maintaining military vehicles with the Auxiliary Territorial Service at the end of World War II.

“It embodied everything that was British tradition: solid, reliable, not particularly showy or extravagant,” Patrick Collins, research and inquiries officer at the National Motor Museum Trust in Britain, said of the Rover brand. In 1953, when Land Rover was only five years old, the queen rode in a Series 1 on her first royal tour after her coronation; last year, she drove herself to the Royal Windsor Horse Show in a third-generation Range Rover.

As her reign entered the internet era, widely circulated images of Elizabeth looking unamused behind the wheel of a hulking Range Rover earned her a new crown: meme queen. With captions like “current mood” and “they see me ruling, they hating,” pictures of the royal vehicles contributed to an impression that the queen was someone who kept her eyes on the road, and the haters in the rearview.

— Callie Holtermann


Her corgis

Associated Press

When Clay Bennett, a Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist for The Chattanooga Times Free Press, was brainstorming ideas for how best to address and mark the death of Queen Elizabeth II, he initially considered drawing her gloves or a fancy hat. Then he settled on the one characteristic that he felt most connected him to the monarch: a shared love of dogs. In the queen’s case, a love of her corgis, specifically.

In a heart-rending image that was widely shared on social media and international television, Mr. Bennett drew an unattended corgi — the end of its leash fallen to the ground — with the dog’s neck turned, looking for its person. The caption reads simply, “Queen Elizabeth II 1926-2022.” “I wanted to draw a corgi as a symbol of the U.K.,” Mr. Bennett said in an interview.

Elizabeth was an 18-year-old princess when she received her first beloved corgi, Susan, the progenitor of all her corgis (and dorgis, after a dachshund made its way into the lineage) to come. In the years and decades since, the queen was frequently photographed walking the grounds of one castle or another with her corgis, the most loyal of her loyal subjects.

The queen was rarely witnessed publicly meting out affection or familial care. But when she walked with her corgis, she provided a touchstone for people all over the world to connect with the most remote and private of global leaders.

“They humanized her,” said the journalist Elizabeth Holmes, who has also written for The New York Times. “But they also allowed her to be human.”

— Katherine Rosman


Her walking sticks

Pool photo by Arthur Edwards

Last year, while attending a service at Westminster Abbey, Queen Elizabeth II used a walking stick publicly for the first time in 17 years. (She was last seen using a walking stick after having knee surgery in 2003.)

From then on, a walking stick regularly made an appearance in the monarch’s hand.

Among the most recognizable were one that belonged to her husband, Prince Philip, and another that was a gift from the British Army in honor of her Platinum Jubilee.

“It was quite a plain, simple type of stick, but sometimes the simple ones are the most elegant,” said Dennis Wall of Ulverston, England, a former hobbyist whose handmade stick was selected from among nine others commissioned by the army for the queen.

In addition to representing the queen’s dedication to her responsibilities as head of the Church of England and the British Armed Forces, the sticks were also symbols of her staying power, said Erin Delaney, a professor at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law who researches the British Constitution.

“There is something about fidelity, and that kind of long service and relationship, that speaks to strength, and not frailty,” she said.

The queen’s willingness to publicly use a walking stick also made her an emblem of women’s empowerment and what it means to “age gracefully,” said Maria Claver, director of the gerontology program at California State University, Long Beach.

“Queen Elizabeth is an example of grace,” Dr. Claver said. “The fact that she has been so active in her role as queen, and that she has shown up, I think that helps people see that this is what aging could be like.”

— Isabella Paoletto


Her kerchiefs

From left; Julian Finney/Getty Images, Chris Jackson/Getty Images, Pool photo by Andrew Milligan

When the singer Justin Bieber was photographed wearing a head scarf knotted under his chin at a concert in November, the internet threw one of its periodic tantrums. Accusations that he had appropriated the hijab or mocked Islam were hurled at him from around the world. It did not help that it was far from the first time Mr. Bieber was busted for a cultural misstep. (Remember his cornrows?)

What seemed oddest about the brouhaha was that the Canadian-born singer may not, in fact, have been mimicking the hijab so much as following a street-style trend whose unlikely originator was the British monarch. For decades, Queen Elizabeth II was routinely photographed during downtime — mounted on horseback, hiking at her 50,000-acre Scottish estate or picnicking with her family — with a head scarf knotted under her chin. The queen favored scarves that tended to be artfully patterned classic silk squares from the French luxury-goods house Hermès.

While few could have anticipated that urban guys would take up a style worn without controversy by middle-aged ladies to protect their hair, that is exactly what happened. Over the past several years, young men in cities everywhere appeared with Hermès chin-tied head scarves worn granny-style. Did they intend any disrespect to the hijab? Were they flouting gender norms? Or were they aping Elizabeth? We will probably never know. When it comes to influences, both fashion and Justin Bieber are eternally and blissfully happy in their ignorance.

— Guy Trebay


Her brooches

From left; Pool photo by Chris Jackson, Pool photo by Steve Parsons, Chris Jackson/Getty Images

In the early 1950s, when the queen acceded to the throne, brooches were a fashionable piece of jewelry that became a part of her formula for dressing. “It was always in the same position above the heart,” Marion Fasel, a jewelry historian, said. And although they’ve “pretty much fallen out of favor,” Ms. Fasel said, the queen was certainly no trend follower, as brooches remained a fixture of her wardrobe for decades.

There is a story behind how each brooch in her extensive collection came into the queen’s possession, and she wore each one with intention.

“Her choice of brooch was never random,” said Bethan Holt, author of “The Queen: 70 Years of Majestic Style.” “They would be selected for the added meaning they would bring to the moment.”

Elizabeth often received brooches as gifts from world leaders, and she wore them while attending events hosted by those leaders’ countries as a sign of friendship and loyalty. Other times, she wore a brooch commemorating a loved one who had given it to her. She also used their colors to convey a message, as she did with her other fashion choices.

For her first public appearance after the death of her husband, Prince Philip, for instance, she wore a gold Andrew Grima brooch encrusted with diamonds and rubies that Philip had given her. And during a visit from President Donald J. Trump in 2018, she wore a brooch that had been given to her by former President Barack Obama.

— Sadiba Hasan


Her palette

From left, pool photo by Adrian Dennis, Stuart C. Wilson/Getty Images, Alan Crowhurst/Getty Images

Nothing that the queen wore was a mistake. Everything was forensically and meticulously planned according to occasion, duty, hosts, guests, custom and formality — including her bold choice of color palette.

“She wore bright colors because she believed it was her duty to be seen by the people who waited, wet and cold, behind barriers for hours at a time,” wrote Sali Hughes, author of “Our Rainbow Queen,” a book divided into color-blocked chapters that chart the assorted hues Her Majesty would wear from head to toe, allowing her to stand out in a crowd.

And so over the seven decades of her rule, there she was, come rain or shine. Visiting a school or a hospital or a world leader, sporting tailored coats, dresses and skirt suits (never trousers) in lemon yellows and letterbox reds, dusky pinks and royal purples and — famously, for her 90th birthday — a deliciously vivid neon green. Angela Kelly, the queen’s senior dresser, explained in 2019 that given Britain’s regular showers, the queen even had a collection of clear umbrellas with a range of different color trims to match her outfits. After all, when it came to her wardrobe, nothing was left to chance — or dictated by passing trends.

“The queen and queen mother do not want to be fashion setters,” said Norman Hartnell, the British couturier who designed the queen’s coronation gown. “That’s left to other people with less important work to do.”

— Elizabeth Paton


Her likeness

Oliver Dietze/DPA, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

For all the queen’s carefully chosen totems of power, it was perhaps one she couldn’t choose — her face — that bonded her most deeply with her public. And she knew it. “I have to be seen to be believed,” the queen reportedly said, recognizing that her image itself was currency — and not just on currency, as she became the first monarch to appear on British bank notes, in 1960.

The stoic three-quarter portrait precipitated a series of updated likenesses throughout the years, featuring nearly identical angling but with a gradually pronounced smile. (The last portrait, still in use, was created for the 1990 five-pound note by Roger Withington, when the queen was 64.)

The first stamp bearing the queen’s image, based on her first official portraits, by the photographer Dorothy Wilding, was issued in 1952, but it is her left-facing profile by Arnold Machin that has remained frozen in time since its release on June 5, 1967. “It is thought that this design is the most reproduced work of art in history,” according to Buckingham Palace, with over 200 billion copies made.

Consistency might have been key in ensuring dominion over the Commonwealth, but it was the evolution of the queen’s likeness that ultimately humanized her. As a modern monarch growing up before the camera, she maintained a rare place in the public imagination, and fashionable photographers such as Norman Parkinson, Lord Snowdon (the queen’s onetime brother-in-law) and, perhaps most significantly, Cecil Beaton helped burnish and brand it.

As with all successful brands, the opportunities for product were endless (and sometimes egregious). This year, the Platinum Jubilee occasioned the release of a collectible Queen Elizabeth II Barbie doll, limited-edition bottles of Moët & Chandon, and even a jaunty white Swatch watch bearing a cartoon queen and one of her corgis. Recognition at a glance.

— Jeremy Allen

Adblock test (Why?)

How do new words enter the dictionary? - Madison.com - Dictionary

(renews at /month + tax)

Adblock test (Why?)

CAD Translation Gets Doctored Up - ENGINEERING.com - Translation

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

CAD Translation Gets Doctored Up  ENGINEERING.com

Monday, September 19, 2022

Queen Elizabeth: A Visual Dictionary - The New York Times - Dictionary

Over her seven decades on the throne, Queen Elizabeth II understood the power of visuals. The first British monarch to have a televised coronation, she watched the world turn its attention from the radio to the TV set, and by the time she died this month at 96, having celebrated her Platinum Jubilee just a few months earlier, she — well, the royal family — had an Instagram account and a YouTube channel.

As she presided over a shrinking empire, projecting stability and continuity was arguably her most essential job as sovereign. From her hairstyle to her handbags, her kerchiefs to her corgis, her pearls to her profile, every visual signifier was a means of communication for a monarch who famously had little to say — at least in public. Here’s a look at the symbols Elizabeth leveraged during her historic reign, and what she used them to say.


Her hair

Dan Kitwood/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Queen Elizabeth II was nothing if not steadfast in her devotion to her country and the style in which she chose to express it, but of all the consistent imagery she created throughout her long life, her carefully sculpted hairstyle might have been the most reliable of all.

From the time she was a girl pictured in black and white on the lawn through her stint in the Auxiliary Territorial Service and then her marriage, coronation and 70 years of rule, through decades of bobs, bouffants, hippie hair and helmet heads, it never really changed: an inch or two shorter or longer here, maybe; slightly more bouffant there; allowed to go white in the 1990s, sure. But otherwise her ’do — chin-length, brushed back at the crown, set in soft curls at either temple and framing her jawline — was the visual equivalent of death and taxes: a rock of reliability in an uncertain world. And like so much about the queen, it was a highly considered choice.

Perfectly and deliberately symmetrical, so that she looked the same from either side and in every portrait; molded to fit snugly under a crown or one of her many hats and scarves, her coif was tended to for over two decades by the hairdresser Ian Carmichael, who visited Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle twice a week until the coronavirus pandemic (when Angela Kelly, the queen’s personal assistant and senior dresser, took over) to make sure there was not a strand out of place. That was just how she rolled.

— Vanessa Friedman


Her handbags

Tim Graham Photo Library, via Getty Images

“She told me she never felt dressed without her bag,” Gerald Bodmer said of Queen Elizabeth II. Mr. Bodmer, 90, is the chief executive of Launer, a British manufacturer of luxury leather goods favored by the queen for her most ever-present accessories: her handbags. (According to Town & Country, her first Launer bag was a gift from her mother decades ago.)

The bags were sturdy, unflashy and constant to an almost metaphorical degree. One of her favorites, Mr. Bodmer said, was the Traviata, a trapezoidal bag made of suede-lined calfskin with a single top strap; the queen sported it in both black leather and the slightly more fanciful black patent leather. It retails for about $2,800. She crashed the Launer website after carrying a cream-colored Lisa — a boxier handbag with two straps — at the 2011 wedding of William and Catherine, now the Prince and Princess of Wales.

The queen was also known for customizing the bags to her liking, preferring longer-than-standard straps. In recent years, Launer took steps to make them lighter for the queen, removing excess materials from the interior for easier carrying, Mr. Bodmer said. “Right to the end of her life, she was carrying a handbag, even when using a walking stick,” he said. “You can’t have a more loyal customer, can you?”

— Madison Malone Kircher


Her gloves

Bryn Lennon/Getty Images

Queen Elizabeth II was known for her restraint. She rarely showed excitement or worry (“Keep calm and carry on,” etc.). She also rarely showed her hands.

The queen almost always wore gloves in public, whether white dress gloves or black leather ones. She waved from balconies and carriages in them, and shook hands in private receiving lines and at public walkabouts with fully sheathed fingers.

“Gloves were a physical barrier between the queen and her subjects,” said Elizabeth Holmes, a journalist who has written widely about the royals. “They projected a certain separation between a monarch and the people.”

Amid a pandemic, it doesn’t seem like the worst idea, particularly when part of your job is to extend your hand to strangers so they can curtsy to you. But her gloves weren’t just a modern practicality — they were a commitment to the past, according to Tina Brown, author of “The Palace Papers.” “The queen came from an era where gloves were the norm, and they added a formal finish to everything she wore,” Ms. Brown said.

A notable break from the royal tradition of gloves came in 1987, when Diana, then the Princess of Wales, shook hands with AIDS patients without gloves. Diana’s bare skin became a symbol of humanity and compassion and offered a contrast to the remoteness conveyed by the gloved hand that the world was at that point extending to people with H.I.V.

— Katherine Rosman


Her pearls

From left, Chris Jackson/Getty Images, Associated Press, Paul Hackett/Reuters

Long before there was Instagram, there was Queen Elizabeth II, keeping a careful eye and a (usually) steady grip on the brand of her ancestors’ start-up, the Firm. She was, essentially, its chief influencer, and she seemed to know that consistent visuals were vital to building a brand identity.

One item that could reliably be seen framing the lower portion of an Elizabeth close-up (no filter necessary) was a pearl necklace — sometimes a double strand, but usually a triple. In portraits, on official state visits, after services at Westminster Abbey, the pearls were there: formal but not fancy, lustrous in glow but not ostentatious in sparkle.

When members of the royal family traveled to Buckingham Palace last week to receive the queen’s coffin as it arrived from Scotland, pearls emerged as an item of poignant homage. Cameras captured Catherine, the Princess of Wales, riding in a car toward the palace with a sad, tired gaze cast out the window and a triple-strand pearl necklace draped below her neck.

According to Elizabeth Holmes, author of “HRH: So Many Thoughts on Royal Style,” pearls are a way for anyone to honor the queen. “The pearls don’t have to be real, they don’t have to be expensive — you can do it, too,” she said. “I think we will see more of it.”

— Katherine Rosman


Her Land Rovers

Max Mumby/Indigo, via Getty Images

Peering over the wheel of a Land Rover, perhaps the make most closely associated with her reign, the queen offered a master class in loyalty to a quintessentially British brand as well as the occasional glimpse, through an untinted window, of her moments of independence.

While the queen’s official duties often kept her in prim pumps in the rear seat of a Daimler limousine, in her personal life she charted her own rugged excursions around the Sandringham and Balmoral Estates from the driver’s seat of a Land Rover Defender. The boxy utility vehicles, which have four-wheel drive and the ground clearance to crawl over rocks and ford streams, matched the unfussy capability of a monarch who trained in driving and maintaining military vehicles with the Auxiliary Territorial Service at the end of World War II.

“It embodied everything that was British tradition: solid, reliable, not particularly showy or extravagant,” Patrick Collins, research and inquiries officer at the National Motor Museum Trust in Britain, said of the Rover brand. In 1953, when Land Rover was only five years old, the queen rode in a Series 1 on her first royal tour after her coronation; last year, she drove herself to the Royal Windsor Horse Show in a third-generation Range Rover.

As her reign entered the internet era, widely circulated images of Elizabeth looking unamused behind the wheel of a hulking Range Rover earned her a new crown: meme queen. With captions like “current mood” and “they see me ruling, they hating,” pictures of the royal vehicles contributed to an impression that the queen was someone who kept her eyes on the road, and the haters in the rearview.

— Callie Holtermann


Her corgis

Associated Press

When Clay Bennett, a Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist for The Chattanooga Times Free Press, was brainstorming ideas for how best to address and mark the death of Queen Elizabeth II, he initially considered drawing her gloves or a fancy hat. Then he settled on the one characteristic that he felt most connected him to the monarch: a shared love of dogs. In the queen’s case, a love of her corgis, specifically.

In a heart-rending image that was widely shared on social media and international television, Mr. Bennett drew an unattended corgi — the end of its leash fallen to the ground — with the dog’s neck turned, looking for its person. The caption reads simply, “Queen Elizabeth II 1926-2022.” “I wanted to draw a corgi as a symbol of the U.K.,” Mr. Bennett said in an interview.

Elizabeth was an 18-year-old princess when she received her first beloved corgi, Susan, the progenitor of all her corgis (and dorgis, after a dachshund made its way into the lineage) to come. In the years and decades since, the queen was frequently photographed walking the grounds of one castle or another with her corgis, the most loyal of her loyal subjects.

The queen was rarely witnessed publicly meting out affection or familial care. But when she walked with her corgis, she provided a touchstone for people all over the world to connect with the most remote and private of global leaders.

“They humanized her,” said the journalist Elizabeth Holmes, who has also written for The New York Times. “But they also allowed her to be human.”

— Katherine Rosman


Her walking sticks

Pool photo by Arthur Edwards

Last year, while attending a service at Westminster Abbey, Queen Elizabeth II used a walking stick publicly for the first time in 17 years. (She was last seen using a walking stick after having knee surgery in 2003.)

From then on, a walking stick regularly made an appearance in the monarch’s hand.

Among the most recognizable were one that belonged to her husband, Prince Philip, and another that was a gift from the British Army in honor of her Platinum Jubilee.

“It was quite a plain, simple type of stick, but sometimes the simple ones are the most elegant,” said Dennis Wall of Ulverston, England, a former hobbyist whose handmade stick was selected from among nine others commissioned by the army for the queen.

In addition to representing the queen’s dedication to her responsibilities as head of the Church of England and the British Armed Forces, the sticks were also symbols of her staying power, said Erin Delaney, a professor at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law who researches the British Constitution.

“There is something about fidelity, and that kind of long service and relationship, that speaks to strength, and not frailty,” she said.

The queen’s willingness to publicly use a walking stick also made her an emblem of women’s empowerment and what it means to “age gracefully,” said Maria Claver, director of the gerontology program at California State University, Long Beach.

“Queen Elizabeth is an example of grace,” Dr. Claver said. “The fact that she has been so active in her role as queen, and that she has shown up, I think that helps people see that this is what aging could be like.”

— Isabella Paoletto


Her kerchiefs

From left; Julian Finney/Getty Images, Chris Jackson/Getty Images, Pool photo by Andrew Milligan

When the singer Justin Bieber was photographed wearing a head scarf knotted under his chin at a concert in November, the internet threw one of its periodic tantrums. Accusations that he had appropriated the hijab or mocked Islam were hurled at him from around the world. It did not help that it was far from the first time Mr. Bieber was busted for a cultural misstep. (Remember his cornrows?)

What seemed oddest about the brouhaha was that the Canadian-born singer may not, in fact, have been mimicking the hijab so much as following a street-style trend whose unlikely originator was the British monarch. For decades, Queen Elizabeth II was routinely photographed during downtime — mounted on horseback, hiking at her 50,000-acre Scottish estate or picnicking with her family — with a head scarf knotted under her chin. The queen favored scarves that tended to be artfully patterned classic silk squares from the French luxury-goods house Hermès.

While few could have anticipated that urban guys would take up a style worn without controversy by middle-aged ladies to protect their hair, that is exactly what happened. Over the past several years, young men in cities everywhere appeared with Hermès chin-tied head scarves worn granny-style. Did they intend any disrespect to the hijab? Were they flouting gender norms? Or were they aping Elizabeth? We will probably never know. When it comes to influences, both fashion and Justin Bieber are eternally and blissfully happy in their ignorance.

— Guy Trebay


Her brooches

From left; Pool photo by Chris Jackson, Pool photo by Steve Parsons, Chris Jackson/Getty Images

In the early 1950s, when the queen acceded to the throne, brooches were a fashionable piece of jewelry that became a part of her formula for dressing. “It was always in the same position above the heart,” Marion Fasel, a jewelry historian, said. And although they’ve “pretty much fallen out of favor,” Ms. Fasel said, the queen was certainly no trend follower, as brooches remained a fixture of her wardrobe for decades.

There is a story behind how each brooch in her extensive collection came into the queen’s possession, and she wore each one with intention.

“Her choice of brooch was never random,” said Bethan Holt, author of “The Queen: 70 Years of Majestic Style.” “They would be selected for the added meaning they would bring to the moment.”

Elizabeth often received brooches as gifts from world leaders, and she wore them while attending events hosted by those leaders’ countries as a sign of friendship and loyalty. Other times, she wore a brooch commemorating a loved one who had given it to her. She also used their colors to convey a message, as she did with her other fashion choices.

For her first public appearance after the death of her husband, Prince Philip, for instance, she wore a gold Andrew Grima brooch encrusted with diamonds and rubies that Philip had given her. And during a visit from President Donald J. Trump in 2018, she wore a brooch that had been given to her by former President Barack Obama.

— Sadiba Hasan


Her palette

From left, pool photo by Adrian Dennis, Stuart C. Wilson/Getty Images, Alan Crowhurst/Getty Images

Nothing that the queen wore was a mistake. Everything was forensically and meticulously planned according to occasion, duty, hosts, guests, custom and formality — including her bold choice of color palette.

“She wore bright colors because she believed it was her duty to be seen by the people who waited, wet and cold, behind barriers for hours at a time,” wrote Sali Hughes, author of “Our Rainbow Queen,” a book divided into color-blocked chapters that chart the assorted hues Her Majesty would wear from head to toe, allowing her to stand out in a crowd.

And so over the seven decades of her rule, there she was, come rain or shine. Visiting a school or a hospital or a world leader, sporting tailored coats, dresses and skirt suits (never trousers) in lemon yellows and letterbox reds, dusky pinks and royal purples and — famously, for her 90th birthday — a deliciously vivid neon green. Angela Kelly, the queen’s senior dresser, explained in 2019 that given Britain’s regular showers, the queen even had a collection of clear umbrellas with a range of different color trims to match her outfits. After all, when it came to her wardrobe, nothing was left to chance — or dictated by passing trends.

“The queen and queen mother do not want to be fashion setters,” said Norman Hartnell, the British couturier who designed the queen’s coronation gown. “That’s left to other people with less important work to do.”

— Elizabeth Paton


Her likeness

Oliver Dietze/DPA, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

For all the queen’s carefully chosen totems of power, it was perhaps one she couldn’t choose — her face — that bonded her most deeply with her public. And she knew it. “I have to be seen to be believed,” the queen reportedly said, recognizing that her image itself was currency — and not just on currency, as she became the first monarch to appear on British bank notes, in 1960.

The stoic three-quarter portrait precipitated a series of updated likenesses throughout the years, featuring nearly identical angling but with a gradually pronounced smile. (The last portrait, still in use, was created for the 1990 five-pound note by Roger Withington, when the queen was 64.)

The first stamp bearing the queen’s image, based on her first official portraits, by the photographer Dorothy Wilding, was issued in 1952, but it is her left-facing profile by Arnold Machin that has remained frozen in time since its release on June 5, 1967. “It is thought that this design is the most reproduced work of art in history,” according to Buckingham Palace, with over 200 billion copies made.

Consistency might have been key in ensuring dominion over the Commonwealth, but it was the evolution of the queen’s likeness that ultimately humanized her. As a modern monarch growing up before the camera, she maintained a rare place in the public imagination, and fashionable photographers such as Norman Parkinson, Lord Snowdon (the queen’s onetime brother-in-law) and, perhaps most significantly, Cecil Beaton helped burnish and brand it.

As with all successful brands, the opportunities for product were endless (and sometimes egregious). This year, the Platinum Jubilee occasioned the release of a collectible Queen Elizabeth II Barbie doll, limited-edition bottles of Moët & Chandon, and even a jaunty white Swatch watch bearing a cartoon queen and one of her corgis. Recognition at a glance.

— Jeremy Allen

Adblock test (Why?)

Breaking into English - lareviewofbooks - Translation

IN 2016, MEXICAN ESSAYIST Mariana Oliver released her debut collection, Aves migratorias. In March 2017, she read a fragment of the book on a podcast, catching the attention of the literary translator Julia Sanches. At the time, Sanches, a former literary agent, had just quit her job and moved to Rhode Island, where she was debating her next professional steps. She ordered a copy of Aves migratorias, waited the seeming eternity it can often take for a book to cross national borders, and, after reading the collection, began to translate an excerpt. She submitted the resulting English-language essay to several journals, but had no luck until Charlotte Whittle, a fellow translator and Oliver fan, included it in her pitch for an issue of the international literary magazine Words Without Borders focusing on women essayists from Mexico — an issue that eventually came out in May 2020. Adam Levy, one of the founding editors of the Oakland-based publisher Transit Books, read the essay and reached out to Sanches, and, as she told me, “the rest is history.” Migratory Birds came out from Transit a year later and went on to win the 2022 PEN Translation Prize.

This years-long story is not, in the world of translation, uncommonly slow. If anything, six years between the publication of the original text and its English translation is rather speedy, especially for a literary work whose author is not a known quantity in the United States. Books like Oliver’s often take a long time to appear in English, finding publishers only through intense effort and great patience on their translators’ part. Indeed, translators frequently double — or, really, quadruple — as literary agents, scouts, and tastemakers. So do the editors who make a point of working with them. It is telling that Sanches first published her translation of Oliver’s work in a journal that rarely prints creative works written originally in English; telling, too, that Levy runs a press that specializes in translation. Increasingly, translated literature in the United States exists in its own ecosystem, one that Eric Becker, digital director and senior editor at Words Without Borders, says “grew out of necessity.” The journal was founded in 2003, he told me, to “address the fact that there wasn’t much work being published in translation.” Twenty years later, the translation landscape is growing, and the magazine has expanded its mission, striving not only to publish translated works but also to “reach people who may not even know they’re interested in international literature” and to advocate for the translators and critics who help that work enter the American literary conversation.

Of course, the question of what constitutes advocacy in the literary world is a complex one. For Words Without Borders, Becker told me, it means crediting translators, paying writers and translators equally, and actively seeking to launch new writers’ and translators’ careers. The magazine has published some 3,000 poems, stories, and essays by authors from over 140 countries, giving many — including every writer mentioned in this essay — their first English-language exposure or helping their work grab the attention of agents who can further their careers. Crucially, that exposure is readily available to anyone with an internet connection: unlike many print-only or print-focused literary journals, which tend to rely on a subscription model, Words Without Borders is free.

But free isn’t always a good thing. Many translators, myself included, are exhaustingly familiar with the expectation that we should work for little or no pay. One way to resist that idea is simply to expose it; another, for many translators, is cooperative action. Translators’ collectives are abundant; online and in industry groups like the American Literary Translators Association, translators offer each other information and support that can be vital in the often opaque publishing industry. Asked about the effect of her agenting past on her translation present, including her role as the chair of the Authors Guild’s Translation Group, Sanches said that this insider knowledge “makes me a better advocate for myself and my peers.” She then highlighted the Authors Guild’s model translation contract, which is heavily annotated and includes the explicit statement that “a large number of U.S. translators are being paid rates that make it difficult, if not impossible, to earn a living, so we continue urging translators to ask for fair compensation and publishers to provide it.” Arguably, fair compensation is the bedrock on which any other politics of translation must rest; as Jhumpa Lahiri writes in the introduction to her 2022 essay collection Translating Myself and Others, it’s hard to perform the “essential aesthetic and political mission of opening linguistic and cultural borders” without being able to make the rent.

Yet many translators still set out not only to open borders but also to break barriers. Without their efforts — and without the continuing presence of translation-oriented journals and presses willing to take risks and “think expansively,” as Sanches puts it, “about who their potential readers are” — it would be highly difficult for marginalized writers, or writers whose work is strange, challenging, or unclassifiable, to be published in translation. Breaking into the competitive, commercialized US market would be harder still; Becker points out that, although it troubles him that translation is often treated as “its own genre,” that very phenomenon helps create a platform for translated literature. Besides, for many writers, having their work appear in English is itself a promise of opportunity. Miguelángel Meza, a Paraguayan poet who writes in Guaraní and self-translates into Spanish, told me via email that, although he feels no different about seeing his work in English than he does seeing it in Spanish, he’s conscious that “being translated into English opens doors that [he] could never reach before.”

Meza is both an advocate and something of a groundbreaker himself. He’s been writing in Guaraní since well before Paraguay’s 1992 constitution made it an official language, and is among a small but growing number of writers whose work has been translated from Guaraní and other Indigenous Latin American languages into English. Meza’s sparse, lyrical poetry draws heavily on Mbyá Guaraní cosmology. His translator Elisa Taber, who reads Guaraní, asked to translate his collection Dream Pattering Soles into English, and collaborated closely with him — which, he told me, was an “immense joy” — to keep the translation fully grounded in Guaraní culture. Taber’s translations of Meza’s work first appeared as part of the Indigenous Writing Project from Words Without Borders, which not only helped his poems reach English-language readers but also helped contextualize them. For Taber, this is key: her goal, she said in a Poetry Foundation interview with her editor, Silvina López Medin, has been to ensure that the work would be understood “on its own terms,” not in terms of what anglophone readers might consider “canonically legitimate.”

It’s worth pointing out that López Medin edits for Ugly Duckling Presse, an avant-garde publishing collective that’s often at the forefront of translated Latin American poetry. Ugly Duckling, with its experimental reputation and internationally minded audience, is unusually well positioned to work with Meza, who sees publishing with the firm as a way to continue his “production and defense of literature in Paraguayan Guaraní, which is a passion that stems from my earliest youth and that I see as a form of ministry. It goes hand-in-hand with my poetry, and has since I can remember.” (All of Meza’s comments were written in Spanish, and appear here in my translation.)

For the Welsh writer Manon Steffan Ros, who, like Meza, self-translates, success has looked quite different, although she shares Meza’s commitment to pushing against the dominance of a colonial language — which, for her, is English. Her 2018 novel Llyfr Glas Nebo, which she sees as “quintessentially Welsh,” got noticed not by an individual translator, as was the case for Meza, but by two major cultural-promotion engines: the Wales Literature Exchange and Literature Across Frontiers. Ros wound up working with Sterling Lord Literistic, a major agency, to get The Blue Book of Nebo, her translation of Llfyr Glas Nebo, to publishers, including Dallas’s translation-centered Deep Vellum Books, who made it a US hit in 2021.

Although Ros was surprised by her novel’s international appeal, she told me that she has come to see its “very basic themes as fears and loves that are universal. We love our families. We’re afraid of what is happening to the world. We love our children, and we must let them go. People everywhere think about these things, and they are the bare bones of this story.” It’s quite possible that this universality — or, rather, this version of universality, acceptable across a range of political and social perspectives — goes some way toward explaining the institutional support the novel received in Wales.

Another recent translated hit, South Korean novelist Sang Young Park’s Booker-nominated Love in the Big City (2019), had a much tougher path to translation. The novel is, as Spencer Lee-Lenfield writes, a “comic alternative to the queer novel of tragic seriousness.” Its protagonist, a writer named Young, drinks and jokes his way through professional setbacks, familial trouble, social boredom, and what can seem like an absolute swarm of bad boyfriends. When I asked Park how Young, if he were real, would react to the book’s success, which includes rave reviews on top of the Booker nod, he told me that he imagined Young resorting to his usual “self-deprecating brand of humor, saying, ‘It’s kind of ridiculous that the whole world right now is reading about how I get drunk and throw up and get laid.’”

Of course, throwing up and getting laid are some of the most universal experiences out there — just as universal as the parental fear and love at the heart of The Blue Book of Nebo. Yet the translator Anton Hur, who came across an early short story of Park’s and immediately set out to translate his work into English, struggled to find institutional support. He told me that, as a queer translator, it is important to him to work on books that belong to the “long and rich tradition of queerness in Korean literature,” even when he couldn’t get funding from the Korean institutions that often underwrite sample translations. I asked Hur how he maintained his energy and optimism in the face of this disinterest, and he shot back, “I don’t know what you mean — I have neither!” Shortly afterwards, though, he spoke of being

inspired by colleagues who were activist translators in the sense that they wanted to change the face of Korean literature in translation to be more inclusive, to be anticolonial, to burn things down. Colleagues like Deborah Smith, Sophie Bowman, Victoria Caudle, and Soje, who aren’t just translating bestsellers or doing one book after another because someone told them to. They made me see how translators can change literary discourse at a fundamental level.


Activist translation is a major part of Love in the Big City’s story. So is activist editing, not to mention queer solidarity — Park told me he’s always “seen himself as part of the world queer literature community,” and the novel has received the support of Eileen Myles, Alexander Chee, and other queer anglophone writers. Hur translated a sample of Love in the Big City without getting paid to do so, and found it homes with Peter Blackstock at Grove Atlantic in the United States and the aforementioned Deborah Smith at Tilted Axis Press in the United Kingdom. Blackstock has worked with queer writers such as Douglas Stuart and Akwaeke Emezi, and has said that he actively seeks a list that “represents the world”; Smith, meanwhile, founded Tilted Axis, a nonprofit translation press whose mission includes rejecting the “monoculture of globalisation.” Both Smith and Blackstock pushed Hur toward anticolonial translation practices, nudging him to ground the text in Korean language and culture rather than smoothing it out for English-speaking readers. Blackstock, at one point, flagged the phrase “side dishes” in the text and, as Hur tells it, wrote, “‘Don’t you mean banchan? Just say banchan.’ I basically do everything my editors tell me to, but wow, that was such a great moment. I don’t know if Peter even remembers putting that comment in the manuscript, but I’m going to remember it for the rest of my life.”

In corresponding with Hur and Park about Love in the Big City, I found myself intensely frustrated on Hur’s behalf — and intensely grateful both for his persistence and for the many forms of solidarity and advocacy that made it pay off. Julia Sanches thinks that without activist magazines like Words Without Borders and small presses like Deep Vellum, Tilted Axis, Transit, and Ugly Duckling, as she told me, “the country would be cluttered with more and more of the same or very similar books.” For that to happen would be not just a loss but a waste of the literary abundance that exists outside the borders of the English language — and outside the borders of expectation. I never thought I’d get hooked by a novel about postapocalyptic parenthood in Wales — and before encountering Ugly Duckling’s trilingual edition of Dream Pattering Soles, I’d never read a word of Guaraní. I’m grateful for those opportunities, just as I’m grateful to get to see bits of my own reading life refracted though Oliver’s essays, or my not-literary-at-all life in Young’s misadventures in Seoul and Bangkok. All readers deserve — and should ask for — these chances. The more kinds of literature we demand and support, the bigger our world will get.

¤


Lily Meyer is a writer, critic, and translator. Her translations include Claudia Ulloa Donoso’s story collections Little Bird (2021) and Ice for Martians (2022).

¤


Featured image: Klänge (1913) by Vasily Kandinsky. Image has been cropped.

Adblock test (Why?)

Sunday, September 18, 2022

How to limit Spell Checks to Main Dictionary in Word or Outlook - TheWindowsClub - Dictionary

We and our partners use cookies to Store and/or access information on a device. We and our partners use data for Personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, audience insights and product development. An example of data being processed may be a unique identifier stored in a cookie. Some of our partners may process your data as a part of their legitimate business interest without asking for consent. To view the purposes they believe they have legitimate interest for, or to object to this data processing use the vendor list link below. The consent submitted will only be used for data processing originating from this website. If you would like to change your settings or withdraw consent at any time, the link to do so is in our privacy policy accessible from our home page.

Adblock test (Why?)

Saturday, September 17, 2022

Man Admits to Threatening Dictionary for Its Gender Definitions - Yahoo News - Dictionary

Merriam Webster dictionary
Merriam Webster dictionary

Last week, a California man pleaded guilty in a Massachusetts federal court to having threatened to commit anti-LGBTQ+ violence against Merriam-Webster, the dictionary publisher.

Jeremy David Hanson, 34, of Rossmoor, Calif., pled guilty in a plea deal to charges of interstate communication for threatening Merriam-Webster employees, as well as a charge of the same offense against the president of the University of North Texas, the Department of Justice said in an announcement of the plea. Additionally, Hanson admitted to sending threats to various corporations, politicians, and others in a written statement of facts included in his plea agreement. Some of his targets included the Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, the Mayor of New York City, and a New York rabbi and Loyola Marymount University professors. He also targeted Disney, court records state.

Hanson's practice of targeting people was based on their gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation in his threatening communications, he admitted in his pleading. 

Hanson was arrested and charged in April and subsequently indicted by a federal grand jury in May.

"Every member of our community has a right to live and exist authentically as themselves without fear," said United States Attorney Rachel S. Rollins. "Hate motivated threats of violence that infringe upon that right are not tolerated in Massachusetts in any capacity. This conviction represents my office's dedication to protecting targeted communities and bringing accountability and justice when those who aim to endanger act upon their hatred."

Merriam-Webster received several threats and comments against specific gender identities between October 2 and 8 last year, and he submitted them through the "Contact Us" page on Merriam-Webster's website as well as the comments section on its websites under the word entries for "Girl" and "Woman."

A portion of the justice departments statement outlines what happened next:

Hanson used the handle "@anonYmous" to post the following comment on the dictionary's website definition of "female:" "It is absolutely sickening that Merriam-Webster now tells blatant lies and promotes anti-science propaganda. There is no such thing as 'gender identity.' The imbecile who wrote this entry should be hunted down and shot."

On the "Contact Us" page, Hanson wrote, "[Your] headquarters should be shot up and bombed. It is sickening that you have caved to the cultural Marxist, anti-science tranny agenda and altered the definition of 'female' as part of the Left's efforts to corrupt and degrade the English language and deny reality. You evil Marxists should all be killed. It would be poetic justice to have someone storm your offices and shoot up the place, leaving none of you commies alive."

Several days later, Hanson posted another threatening comment on the dictionary's website and a threatening message via the "Contact Us" page:

"I am going to shoot up and bomb your offices for lying and creating fake definitions to pander to the tranny mafia. Boys aren't girls, and girls aren't boys. The only good Marxist is a dead Marxist. I will assassinate your top editor. You sickening, vile tranny freaks," Hanson wrote.

Merriam-Webster closed its Springfield offices in response to the threats.

Authorities later identified the user as Hanson.

He is scheduled to be sentenced in January and faces up to five years in prison and a maximum $250,000 fine.

Adblock test (Why?)