Ugly Liberty's

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:10:34 -0400, "Ukraina Dvi"
wrote:

Uh Reid,

Uh? Is that a new way of saying Dear?

No. There aren't many people that I refer to so. Besides, I am not that
persuasion either.

You didn't burst my bubble. I agree ... in part. This is the most
unattractive likeness of a living female that I've seen on a coin, to
my eyes as well. But the most unattractive ever is Medusa, to my eyes:

http://rg.ancients.info/medusa

But the hard part is that Medusa is a devinity, and not a real person. Same
with Gorgon, a devinity on a coin and not an image of an actual person but
rather a conceptualisation of what someone thought they should look like
maybe based on alleged behaviour of said devinity.

Someone felt better about Arethusa he

http://www.geocities.com/scottishmon.../sirakusa7.jpg

But nonetheless a devinity, and not a real person. I would like to think
that the real women of Syracuse were all goddesses, and they might have
been.





And the St. Gaudens $20 has a lovely figural portrait of feminine liberty,
the original not waify $20 and not the anorexic abomination on the recent
gold bullion coins.

I like both, the newer one better actually, not finding the American
Gold Eagle Liberty anorexic but healthy looking. I bet she jogs.


She looks anorexic compared to the healthy woman of the early 20th century.

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:28:51 -0400, Padraic Brown
wrote:

Also, Usenet2007 was being toungue in cheek, I am sure!

I agree. That's why I said I knew he was joking. But you're right that
there are wildly divergent views out there about what should
rightfully be considered pornography. The most laughable example
recently was when arch conservative U.S. Attorney General John
Ashcroft directed the Justice Dept. to cover up the semi-nude "Spirit
of Justice" statue, which cost $8,000, then denied he had anything to
do with this, despite emails indicating the exact opposite. A female
breast is bad. Lying isn't. Makes sense to me! His successor, Alberto
Gonzales, not without fault in other ways, removed the curtains.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 17:04:18 -0400, "Ukraina Dvi"
wrote:

But the hard part is that Medusa is a devinity, and not a real person. Same
with Gorgon, a devinity on a coin and not an image of an actual person but
rather a conceptualisation of what someone thought they should look like
maybe based on alleged behaviour of said devinity.

Medusa and Gorgon are one and the same. More precisely, Medusa is one
of the three Gorgon sisters and is sometimes referred to in ancient
literature as the Gorgon. But neither of her sisters, Stheno and
Euryale, are referred to as the Gorgon, though the three together are
sometimes referred to as the Gorgons.

Someone felt better about Arethusa he

http://www.geocities.com/scottishmon.../sirakusa7.jpg

I like the way Arethusa is depicted on this coin, though I don't love
it. I don't like the Arethusa on the Syracusan coin that's often
considered the most beautiful of ancient coins, the dekadrachm:

http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greec...ysios_I/i.html

Too dour. I like the coin though, particularly the swimming dolphins
around Arethusa, though I don't love it. The reverse design is too
cluttered for my tastes.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:00:26 -0400, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 10:48:45 -0700, Anka wrote:

Bingo! You got that right!

Do did you, according to both the Chicago Manual of Style and the AP
Stylebook. Who would have thunk it? Wouldn't you also think that if
someone plays the role of Miss Thistlebottom, trying however lamely to
make fun of someone for misspelling a word in a Usenet newsgroup,
among the lamest of online behaviors,

Speak for yourself. I read this group, but the group I participate in
with the greatest interest and involvement is alt.usage.english where
correct grammar and spelling are expected. It is also "a Usenet
newsgroup", and we don't consider it lame to make fun of mistakes.

I wouldn't normally point out spelling and grammar errors in this
newsgroup because - unlike you - I don't consider all newsgroups the
same. What you do in one group is not necessarily what you do in
another group.

A spelling or grammatical error is hardly a detraction from a r.c.c.
post, but it can be both a detraction and a distraction from a coin
website. Not too long ago a poster here linked to his website in
which this appears:

"The Roosevelt era American Eagle $2 1/2 and $5 gold coins are
interesting American coins because the design is complete unique where
the image in itched into the flat coin..."

Both Miss Thistlebottom and coin collectors would fault that sentence.



--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
Someone felt better about Arethusa he

http://www.geocities.com/scottishmon.../sirakusa7.jpg

I like the way Arethusa is depicted on this coin, though I don't love
it. I don't like the Arethusa on the Syracusan coin that's often
considered the most beautiful of ancient coins, the dekadrachm:

http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greec...ysios_I/i.html

Too dour. I like the coin though, particularly the swimming dolphins
around Arethusa, though I don't love it. The reverse design is too
cluttered for my tastes.

It is not a lovely representation, but the engraving and artistry are
fantastic. I like the swimming dolphins of course, and they make
re-appearances with Arethusa on modern Italian and Greek banknotes:

http://www.banknotebank.com/notes/906759A.jpg

http://www.banknotebank.com/notes/906347A.jpg

Nice having fairly modern banknotes that tie in with a lovely ancient past.

Whether the personage or depiction is physically attractive can be a muted
point when you consider the application of the design.

Even a bit less modern Italian and Greek coinages have distinct connections
with ancients, but I can even draw comparisons with some American coinages,
particularly those of the Walking Liberty, Standing Liberty, Peace series
etc.

Going back on direct topic of ugly, but not Liberty is the depiction of
Isabella II of Spain on coinage of the late 1850's-1860's where some have
referred to her as the playdoh princess because of her notable lack of a
chin:

http://i1.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/ag/0d/ef54_1.JPG

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
I agree. That's why I said I knew he was joking. But you're right that
there are wildly divergent views out there about what should
rightfully be considered pornography. The most laughable example
recently was when arch conservative U.S. Attorney General John
Ashcroft directed the Justice Dept. to cover up the semi-nude "Spirit
of Justice" statue, which cost $8,000, then denied he had anything to
do with this, despite emails indicating the exact opposite. A female
breast is bad. Lying isn't. Makes sense to me! His successor, Alberto
Gonzales, not without fault in other ways, removed the curtains.



Oh my, I wonder what John A$scroft would think of this:

http://www.banknotebank.com/notes/906308A.jpg

Or better yet, one I have on the way:

http://i4.ebayimg.com/07/i/000/ab/90/e5cd_1_b.JPG

Oh my gawd, she has an exposed mammary gland with a child suckling. ;0~

On Aug 3, 3:43?pm, Anka responds to the professional:

And if history continues
repeating, Miss Thistlebottom will continue to try to disrupt with
similar dimwitted trolling, all the while posing like he's also the
Mother Teresa of numismatics.

Yeah, but... You were wronger than he was!

You have no idea how much wronger.

I corrected him with his own usage from 4 years ago when he first
posted this subject (google this group for "ugly liberties").

So the professional journalist still can't get it right (as usual).

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 18:55:03 -0400, "Ukraina Dvi"
wrote:

It is not a lovely representation, but the engraving and artistry are
fantastic. I like the swimming dolphins of course, and they make
re-appearances with Arethusa on modern Italian and Greek banknotes:

http://www.banknotebank.com/notes/906759A.jpg

http://www.banknotebank.com/notes/906347A.jpg

Nice having fairly modern banknotes that tie in with a lovely ancient past.

I agree completely. One of the collecting activities I like is finding
modern coins and banknotes, and sometimes stamps as well, that depict
a particular ancient coin type, or subject matter of a particular coin
type, that I specialize in. Here's an example with Owls:

http://rg.ancients.info/owls

Even a bit less modern Italian and Greek coinages have distinct connections
with ancients, but I can even draw comparisons with some American coinages,
particularly those of the Walking Liberty, Standing Liberty, Peace series
etc.

I'm going to have to agree with you again. The above coins are
considered, rightfully so I'd say, to be from the golden age of U.S.
coin design, and without question they draw their inspiration from the
classical age of the ancient Romans and Greeks.

Going back on direct topic of ugly, but not Liberty is the depiction of
Isabella II of Spain on coinage of the late 1850's-1860's where some have
referred to her as the playdoh princess because of her notable lack of a
chin:

http://i1.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/ag/0d/ef54_1.JPG

Funny! I hadn't seen this coin before. Pretty unflattering. There are
some remarkably unflattering portraits of rulers throughout history,
though more often the portrait was idealized, I suspect.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 18:59:35 -0400, "Ukraina Dvi"
wrote:

Oh my, I wonder what John A$scroft would think of this:

http://www.banknotebank.com/notes/906308A.jpg

Or better yet, one I have on the way:

http://i4.ebayimg.com/07/i/000/ab/90/e5cd_1_b.JPG

Oh my gawd, she has an exposed mammary gland with a child suckling. ;0~

One of the most beautiful images imaginable is a mother nursing a
baby.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 18:30:33 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

Speak for yourself. I read this group, but the group I participate in
with the greatest interest and involvement is alt.usage.english where
correct grammar and spelling are expected. It is also "a Usenet
newsgroup", and we don't consider it lame to make fun of mistakes.

Give me a break. This is a ridiculous comparison. Of course people in
a newsgroup *about* English usage are going to have different views
about correcting others for their usage than other groups! In other
groups it's generally considered bad form and an ineffective debating
technique to try to discredit someone for their usage or punctuation
or spelling mistakes. The reason for this is that online discussion
groups are and have always been, since the days of BBSes, a cross
between spoken and printed communication. You debate the substance.

Same with a spoken debate actually. Would someone in a presidential or
congressional or college or other debate employ as an argument that
his opponent used the subjunctive tense when they shouldn't have?

Some people carry the relative unimportance of the superficial
appearance of words online to an extreme by deliberately not
capitalizing the first letter of sentences and proper nouns, leaving
out apostrophe in contractions, and so on. I disagree with this
because it can interfere with comprehension or at least the speed of
comprehension. But you let go inadvertent mistakes and focus on the
subject matter ... unless you don't have the knowledge or capacity
otherwise to discuss or debate the subject matter.

DeMayo just carried this to a laughable extreme by not only trying to
discredit by pointing out a spelling/usage mistake, but also by
getting wrong his correction. Ultimately what he's about and always
has been is not carrying out discussion and debate honorably but
instead just trying to disrupt with this kind of idiotic twaddle.
People who discuss and debate honorably concede points to others when
appropriate and admit it when it's shown that they're wrong. I've
never seen DeMayo do any of this. All I see is him doing is trying to
disrupt while ridiculously posing as Saint Numismatist, sticking his
original positions no matter how untenable, and never shutting up.

I wouldn't normally point out spelling and grammar errors in this
newsgroup because - unlike you - I don't consider all newsgroups the
same. What you do in one group is not necessarily what you do in
another group.

I never said or implied that I consider all newsgroups the same.
Inventing a position and attributing it to someone just to attack it
is also an ineffective debating technique and has been recognized as
such since long before the first computer was built.

A spelling or grammatical error is hardly a detraction from a r.c.c.
post, but it can be both a detraction and a distraction from a coin
website.

I agree with you here. A newsgroup and a Web site are different
mediums. Or media. Take your pick. Different media have different
conventions that have evolved over time to best suit the needs of
those who produce and consume information in those media.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos