Saturday, April 24, 2010
Friday, April 23, 2010
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
dis·in·ter·est·ed [dis-in-tuh-res-tid, -tri-stid]
unbiased by personal interest or advantage; not influenced by selfish motives: a disinterested decision by the referee.
not interested; indifferent.
1605–15; dis-1 + interested
—Can be confused: disinterested, uninterested (see usage note at this entry).
1. impartial, neutral, unprejudiced, dispassionate. See fair1.
1. partial, biased.
Disinterested and uninterested share a confused and confusing history. Disinterested was originally used to mean “not interested, indifferent”; uninterested in its earliest use meant “impartial.” By various developmental twists, disinterested is now used in both senses. Uninterested is used mainly in the sense “not interested, indifferent.” It is occasionally used to mean “not having a personal or property interest.”
Many object to the use of disinterested to mean “not interested, indifferent.” They insist that disinterested can mean only “impartial”: A disinterested observer is the best judge of behavior. However, both senses are well established in all varieties of English, and the sense intended is almost always clear from the context.
dis·in·ter·est [dis-in-ter-ist, -trist] Show IPA
absence of interest; indifference.
–verb (used with object)
to divest of interest or concern.
1605–15; dis-1 + interest
—Can be confused: disinterest, uninterest.
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
Cite This Source | Link To disinterested
Word Origin & History
1610s, "unconcerned," the sense we now would ascribe to uninterested; with the sense of "impartial" going to disinteressed (c.1600). Modern meaning of disinterested is first attested 1650s. As things now stand, disinterested means "free from personal bias," while uninterested means "caring nothing for the matter in question."
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper
dis·in·ter·est (dĭs-ĭn'tər-ĭst, -ĭn'trĭst)
Freedom from selfish bias or self-interest; impartiality.
Lack of interest; indifference.
tr.v. To divest of interest.
dis·in·ter·est·ed (dĭs-ĭn'trĭ-stĭd, -ĭn'tə-rěs'tĭd)
Free of bias and self-interest; impartial: "disinterested scientific opinion on fluorides in the water supply" (Ellen R. Shell).
Not interested; indifferent: "supremely disinterested in all efforts to find a peaceful solution" (C.L. Sulzberger).
Having lost interest.
dis·in'ter·est·ed·ly adv., dis·in'ter·est·ed·ness n.
Usage Note: In traditional usage, disinterested can only mean "having no stake in an outcome," as in Since the judge stands to profit from the sale of the company, she cannot be considered a disinterested party in the dispute. This usage was acceptable to 97 percent of the Usage Panel in our 2001 survey. But despite critical disapproval, disinterested has come to be widely used by many educated writers to mean "uninterested" or "having lost interest," as in Since she discovered skiing, she is disinterested in her schoolwork. Oddly enough, "not interested" is the oldest sense of the word, going back to the 17th century. This sense became outmoded in the 18th century but underwent a revival in the first quarter of the early 20th. Despite its resuscitation, this usage is widely considered an error. In our 2001 survey, 88 percent of the Usage Panel rejected the sentence It is difficult to imagine an approach better designed to prevent disinterested students from developing any intellectual maturity. This is not a significantly different proportion from the 89 percent who disapproved of a similar usage in 1988.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Main Entry: dis·in·ter·est·ed
Pronunciation: dis-'in-t&-r&s-t&d, -'in-tr&s-, -'in-t&-"res-
: free of any interest esp. of a pecuniary nature : IMPARTIAL disinterested person to witness the will>
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
Posted by B.man at 4/21/2010 03:02:00 PM
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Scan from the original 11" x 14" archival c-print.
Fashions: Marcello DeoLazo
Time to get down on your knees. Time to beg, time to crawl, time to plead. Time to get down on your knees. Get down on your knees when you crawl baby, let me see plead beg crawl baby get down. Get down on your knees when you crawl baby, let me see plead beg crawl baby get down. Get down on your knees when you crawl baby, let me see plead beg crawl baby get down. Baby get down.
This exhibition, Revealed: The Tradition of Male Homoerotic Art, not only shows the similarities between Michelangelo and Mapplethorpe; it also asserts a homosexual presence in Western art from the Renaissance to the present day by showing unambig-uous images of male same-sex desire. While such “homoerotic” imagery (defying time-restrictive labels such as “gay art” or “queer art”) evolved over time from something secretive, suppressed, and suggested into something public, accessible, and explicit, its continuous presence affirms the importance of intentionally expressing homosexual desire in art.Since the Renaissance, when sodomy was a crime for which artists could be arrested (as Botticelli, Da Vinci, and others were), recognition of the homosexual presence in art has been obfuscated by suppression, shame, and censorship. Michelangelo, who suffered all of these, nonetheless produced some of the most passionate love poetry by a man to a man and some of the most beautiful images of male sensuality. As with Mapplethorpe, four hundred fifty years later, the controversial nature of Michelangelo’s work provoked censorship: his homoerotic poetry was quickly edited in favor of an opposite-sex love interest, while the nudity of the magnificent David and many of the luxuriant Sistine Chapel figures was immediately covered. Centuries of suppression followed, as critics perfunctorily denied his homoerotic intent. Knowing that Michelangelo defied the conventions of his time may now offer a wider range of homoerotic interpretations of his civic and religious art, but his drawing Ganymede, included here as a reproduction, leaves no doubt as to its homoerotic intent.For centuries after Michelangelo, the sensual male nude remained the best means of expressing homosexual desire in art. However, artists often set their ever-inventive expressions of that desire in some kind of conventional framework that resisted solely erotic interpretations.The trend of making merely suggestive work began to change in the late 19th century when the coining of the term “homosexual” provided a concrete identity around which a community could slowly form. However, artists typically created their most overtly homoerotic imagery in secret. To protect their reputations, they made private works exclusively for friends in an underground homosexual community. Thus over a half-century of striking but obscured artistic output emerged. Fashion photographer George Platt Lynes (1907-55), whose exquisite and elegant photography is featured prominently in this exhibition, helped pioneer the representation of the male nude as explicitly erotic. The famous Precisionist Charles Demuth (1883-1935); the avant-garde writer Jean Cocteau (1889-1963); the Magic Realist artists and one-time lovers Jared French (1905-88) and Paul Cadmus (1904-99); and the Russian-American artists Pavel Tchelitchew (1898-1957) and Andrey Avinoff (1884-1949) all privately created some of the first known artistic images of men having sex. While illustrations portraying homosexual sex acts exist from most periods of history, few purely artistic depictions of homosexual sex exist before these 20th century examples. – Robert Diamond, curator [more]