La Verite bicycles, 1895

[booksandcheeses.livejournal.com]

Because when I think bikes, I think "nude chained to a well."

(pops a bit bigger)

Comments

[jasonbeast.livejournal.com]

Further proof that, even in the 1890s, undressed women could sell any damn thing.

[singeaddams.livejournal.com]

The hell?

[benbenberi.livejournal.com]

Naked women sell anything, anytime. OK. I get that.

But why is this naked woman chained up and making the sign of horns? That, I don't get...

[inversecalico.livejournal.com]

Because she's horny! It's a coded message; look at where her other hand is pointing.

[pikkewyntjie.livejournal.com]

Because although she has obviously made some bad life choices recently, graduating from the University of Texas wasn't one of them and she's showing her Longhorn pride.

Hook 'em Horns and keep Austin weird!

[pikkewyntjie.livejournal.com]

No, wait. It's rush week and this is a hazing stunt, but so worth it. Getting into the right sorority is everything and, oh, yeah, she's totally in.

[fallconsmate.livejournal.com]

nudes, i dunno about. but the well has a bike chain and pedals as the machinery to lift the bucket up and down.

and EVEN THEN people were expecting wimmens not to have pubic hair. idjits.

[booksandcheeses.livejournal.com]

I get the bike chain as the bucket-pulley-thing, but I don't understand the ankle chain at all!

And don't get me started about the hairlessness.

[fallconsmate.livejournal.com]

i get the ankle chain. then again...well. *ahem* how about that local sports team? and hasnt the weather been rather...weathery for this time of year? *smirks*

people's bodies have hair. some people have more, some have less. hell, we called the grandbaby "chia-pet". (she was a bit premature and still had all that fuzz that babies have in utero. she's also a gorgeous not-so-little thing at 12.5 pounds...at 5 weeks old. premature, and an ounce shy of 10 pounds!)

and TheEngineer can do body-doubles for a werewolf. so yeah. hairlessness, its just plain silly. ;)

[booksandcheeses.livejournal.com]

The grandbaby sounds adorable!

And *sigh* fine, I'll remain a naif about the ankle chain. :P I'm a naif about most things anyway, really.

[fallconsmate.livejournal.com]

i think the ankle chain was there for the smexiness factor. "whoo-hoo our bicycles are RACY!!"

well, there's a pun for ya right there. *G*

and the grandbaby is adorable, 10 days was definitely hardly any time at all for the baby adoration society. :D

[basje.livejournal.com]

I think women have not had public hair in art since the birth of art, pretty much. If you look at Italian Renaissance or stuff even older, no women had hair, ever ever. But women have been removing hair for a long time as well so it's not that surprising really.

[fallconsmate.livejournal.com]

i think part of it goes back to greek art, where they did mostly carving statues and so hair is harder to reproduce...

not to mention that a LOT of the really famous early artists (michelangelo comes to mind, so does da vinci) were rumored to be gay. looking at some of the "women" statues, they dont look right because they have male musculature! (overdeveloped muscling for the average non-weightlifting female form, not much in the way of breast development, more narrow hips [with the exception of women with big ol hips and butts] than most women's, etc)

[basje.livejournal.com]

Do you think it was because they were gay, or because it was harder to get a female model / less common to really look well at women to figure out their muscles and build? In German renaissance art there are some very weird things going on with the female body as well, it seems like they didn't really study it at all. I'm not sure how, well, prudish renaissance Italy was in the way of really studying women well?

[fallconsmate.livejournal.com]

the greeks would have had female slaves to model. (statuary)

and even the italians, how hard would it have been to go rent a prostitute for a day? give her a day's wage, feed her a meal, there ya go. there were a few artists who DID do women well, that there is evidence that women models WERE available. its one of those things that is an open secret that some of the really great artists were gay...and their preference shows in how they drew women. its like there was a thought "ok, woman...supposed to be sexy...yep, that's sexy to me!" some of the female forms in the sistine chapel are just...wow. that's...female? wow.

then there's reubens...and that man LOVED him some voluptous nekkid women. :D

[basje.livejournal.com]

Michelangelo's "David" definitely does seem kind of a gay statue though! :D

[fallconsmate.livejournal.com]

that one's rumored to have been a lover of michelangelo!

[mystical-chickn.livejournal.com]

Am I the only one trying to figure out where the heel of the chained foot is supposed to be?

[fallconsmate.livejournal.com]

she's got her foot turned to where the top of the foot is facing outward, toes pointed down. the heel of her foot is totally *behind* the rest of it, just below the ankle-chain.

[suzycat.livejournal.com]

This is possibly the most strange and confusing vintage advertisement I have ever seen.

\m/

[fuzzilla.livejournal.com]

Her legs are closed so you can't tell if she's hairless or not.

There's not only nothing in the image to suggest "bikes," but nothing in the wording, either (unless there is and I don't know French? I'm assuming someone recognized the name of the company?).

[aprilstarchild.livejournal.com]

I saw this once in a book of old bicycle posters (which is sadly out of print, and copies in good shape can be worth over a hundred dollars IIRC). Even the folks who wrote the book could not figure out what in the fuck was going on in this ad.