View allAll Photos Tagged Introspection
Photography: Gastón Torres
Art direction: Juan Cruz Taurel
Styling & Make up: Iara Gernetti
Model: Indiamara Deggerone @ REBEL MANAGEMENT
Thanks: Aku
Más y sin censura:
Acrylic on paper mounted on wood fiberboard panel; 99.1 x 64.8 cm.
Mark Rothko, original name Marcus Rothkovitch, American painter whose works introduced contemplative introspection into the melodramatic post-World War II Abstract Expressionist school; his use of colour as the sole means of expression led to the development of Colour Field Painting.
In 1913 Rothko’s family emigrated from Russia to the U.S., where they settled in Portland, Ore. During his youth he was preoccupied with politics and social issues. He entered Yale University in 1921, intending to become a labour leader, but dropped out after two years and wandered about the U.S. In 1925 he settled in New York City and took up painting. Although he studied briefly under the painter Max Weber, he was essentially self-taught.
Rothko first worked in a realistic style that culminated in his Subway series of the late 1930s, showing the loneliness of persons in drab urban environments. This gave way in the early 1940s to the semi-abstract biomorphic forms of the ritualistic Baptismal Scene (1945). By 1948, however, he had arrived at a highly personal form of Abstract Expressionism. Unlike many of his fellow Abstract Expressionists, Rothko never relied on such dramatic techniques as violent brushstrokes or the dripping and splattering of paint. Instead, his virtually gestureless paintings achieved their effects by juxtaposing large areas of melting colours that seemingly float parallel to the picture plane in an indeterminate, atmospheric space.
Rothko spent the rest of his life refining this basic style through continuous simplification. He restricted his designs to two or three “soft-edged” rectangles that nearly filled the wall-sized vertical formats like monumental abstract icons. Despite their large size, however, his paintings derived a remarkable sense of intimacy from the play of nuances within local colour.
From 1958 to 1966 Rothko worked intermittently on a series of 14 immense canvases (the largest was about 11 × 15 feet [3 × 5 metres]) eventually placed in a nondenominational chapel in Houston, Texas, called, after his death, the Rothko Chapel. These paintings were virtual monochromes of darkly glowing browns, maroons, reds, and blacks. Their sombre intensity reveals the deep mysticism of Rothko’s later years. Plagued by ill health and the conviction that he had been forgotten by those artists who had learned most from his painting, he committed suicide.
After his death, the execution of Rothko’s will provoked one of the most spectacular and complex court cases in the history of modern art, lasting for 11 years (1972–82). The misanthropic Rothko had hoarded his works, numbering 798 paintings, as well as many sketches and drawings. His daughter, Kate Rothko, accused the executors of the estate (Bernard J. Reis, Theodoros Stamos, and Morton Levine) and Frank Lloyd, owner of Marlborough Galleries in New York City, of conspiracy and conflict of interest in selling the works—in effect, of enriching themselves. The courts decided against the executors and Lloyd, who were heavily fined. Lloyd was tried separately and convicted on criminal charges of tampering with evidence. In 1979 a new board of the Mark Rothko Foundation was established, and all the works in the estate were divided between the artist’s two children and the Foundation. In 1984 the Foundation’s share of works was distributed to 19 museums in the United States, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Israel; the best and the largest proportion went to the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
NIKON D70s F1.8 50mm
Q1: What kind of a place is Lo-Sheng Sanatorium?
In 1927, the General Governor of Taiwan started to build Losheng Sanatorium for the quarantine and treatment of leprosy patients. With the force of sanitary police and the medical officers, the general investigation, quarantine, and imprisonment of the leprosy patients were conducted thoroughly in the period from1934 till the end of colonial governance of Japan. As a result, Losheng Sanatorium became the institution of compulsory quarantine as well as life-long imprisonment for the leprosy patients. Now, we consider Losheng Sanatorium as the epitome of the hundred-year sanitary history in Taiwan. It is the only historical mark that can testify the epidemic prevention history of Taiwan, and it is also the best place for us to do the introspection of the human rights of the patients.
Q2: What is the Hansen's disease?
Leprosy, also called the Hansen's disease，is a chronic bacterial disease infecting the skin and nerves in the hands and feet and, in some cases, the respiratory system. In 1873, a Norwegian doctor, Hansen, discovered the pathogenesis of this disease, hence the name Hansen's disease. Leprosy virus is hard to cultivate even in the lab, so the contagiousness is extremely weak. Almost everyone (90% of the human beings) has the natural immunity against leprosy virus. Human is the main infection source of the Hansen's disease, and the upper respiratory tract is the major route of infection. The latent period is spans from three to five years, but could be as long as 40 years. The Hansen's disease is easier to spread in the environment with poor public sanitation facilities. Currently, the good sanitary condition in Taiwan ensures that the Hansen's disease almost has no contagiousness, and there is also effective cure for the disease.
Q3 Why was there a compulsory quarantine policy in the past?
At the beginning of the 20th century, because of the improvement in sanitary condition, the Hansen's disease was almost extinct in Europe and America. However, the Japanese government desired to imitate the militarism of German government, so when they faced the large amount of the domestic leprosy patients, they regarded those patients as "the national humiliation", and began to draw up "the prevention law of Leprosy "in 1907. They planned to isolate the leprosy patients from the society, trying to create the illusion in which the Hansen's disease was extinct.
Q4 What is the influence of the compulsory quarantine policy?
In order to justify its compulsory quarantine policy, the Japanese government exaggerated the contagiousness of the Hansen's disease, and propagandized it to the society with force. They educated people that leprosy was extremely horrible, and used the police force and the spy system to "arrest" the patients and put them in hospitalization. This discriminating experience of being arrested in front of their families, friends, neighbors as well as the ingrained infamy of this policy prevented the Hansen's patients from going back to the society even after the compulsory quarantine policy was relieved. It was a tragedy for those patients to have homes they dared not return to.
Q5 Why is Taiwanese government tearing down the Losheng Sanatorium？
In 1994, Taipei City's Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) System has planned to build a depot on the site where now the Sanatorium is. Chen Jing-Chuan, (陳京川) the ex-director of Losheng was opposed to this decision, and did three surveys among the patients to see what they thought and needed, shortly before he got demoted and reprimanded. Ever since then, the patients had no access to the MRT construction plans and its related discussions.
Q6 Why is it a mistake to build the depot on the Losheng site？
The MRT depot was originally planned to be built on the mountains behind Fu-Jen Catholic University(輔仁大學), but the plan was changed by local politicians. This is wrong for the following reasons:
1. Waste of money: 3/5 of the depot site needs to be built on flatland; therefore $90 million (USD) will be spent on flatting and improving the soil.
2. Disaster for the environment: What comes after flatting the mountains is a ten-story-tall retaining wall, which destroys the natural environment.
3. Safety concern: the future depot will be situated upon earth faults.
4. Ravaged historical site: the Losheng Sanatorium is an important cultural asset for people in East Asia. The depot construction will turn all this treasure into dust.
5. Ordeal for patients: the patients are forced to leave the place they spent their lives, suffering mentally and physically from the displacement.
6. Autocratic decision-making: the MRT Department never inquired the needs of Losheng patients--the 'residents' of the site—which is a violation of fundamental human rights.
Q7 Why should the Losheng Sanatorium be a World Heritage?
1. The Losheng Sanatorium has witnessed the inhumane treatment (such as discrimination and compulsory quarantine) the leprosy patients had undergone through 70 years of governmental oppression. It is a live showcase of Taiwan's colonial past, history of public health and suppressed human rights.
2. The Losheng Sanatorium is one among the few leprosy sanatoriums left. Its architecture has a mixture of Japanese and Gothic style, along with houses and Buddhist shrines built by the patients. The Sanatorium retains its painfully organised structure as an embodiment of its colonial past.
3. The Losheng Sanatorium has met many requirements for World Heritage. One UNESCO committee member who visited Losheng has commented that the Sanatorium is qualified at a World Heritage site. He mentioned one World Heritage site, the Robben Island, where Mandela was imprisoned for 27 years, to exemplify the value of human rights.
4. The international trend of cultural assets conservation emphasizes an 'organic' perspective of preserving, which means not only the architecture is preserved, but also its relationship established by people who lived in it. The Losheng Sanatorium is embedded with history and lifelong memory of the patients, therefore partial preservation would tarnish the integrity of its value. Moreover, the Losheng Sanatorium is a reminder of inhumane quarantine and mistaken political measures for the world to see. Forced displacement is nothing less than another persecution for human rights.
Q8 How does the Taiwanese government plan to settle the patients?
In 2002, the new housing projects was initiated, but instead of 'houses' which were earlier promised to the patients, the new director gave them two tall buildings with modern hospital facilities. It became clear that the new administration team intended to run a hospital business and make money. The patients had no choice but to be removed to another place designed for quarantine.
The skyscraper-ish hospital buildings were designed mainly for housing short-term patients; therefore it has inadequate space for residents to move around freely. Moreover, the hospital management team forbids the patients from bringing with them personal belongings, from cooking, and from coming over to the front building—a discriminative policy.
Q9 How are leprosy patients treated in other countries?
In 2001, the Japanese government formally apologised to the maltreated leprosy patients, and devised reimbursement laws to give them the justice and honor they long missed. Take the example of National Sanatorium Nagashima Aiseien (日本長島愛生園): it retains its old architecture and natural environment for educational purposes; the patients live in well-organised houses; intercom facilities were implemented in the sanatorium for patients who have lost their sight. Every patient has nearly two nurses to take good care of them.
Q10 How come we did not speak out in the initial stages of planning? Why stand out now?
In fact, the depot plan has received severe critiques through the decade, from scholars and social groups alike. In 1994, the Taiwanese Bureau of Health has decided the project would brutally disrupt the patients' lives, or even pose life threatens. In the same year, the Losheng residents started their perpetual war against the violence.
Long before the depot construction was initiated, Loshen's ex-director and history professionals have demanded a large-scale inspection of Losheng's position as a historical site. The scholars appealed to the MRT Department that they should spare the Losheng Sanatorium, while they unanimously agreed the entire site should be preserved. However, the officials were rough enough to terminate the process of inspection, and decided the Sanatorium should be torn down entirely.
It was not until 2004, when Prof. John K.C. Liu (劉可強教授) came up with a symbiosis plan, and when the Concil of Cultural Affairs (文建會) has deemed the Sanatorium a historical spot, that the MRT Department was pressured to rethink the possibilities of preservation.
We sincerely appeal to the governmental officials that they should take the problems seriously. People have eyes to see and ears to listen; we will not be fooled or threatened for life.
Q11. Will MRT Shin-Jhong line not able to function if Losheng sanatorium is not torn down?
A11: Liu, Ko-Chiang, a professor in the Graduate Institute of Building and Planning in National Taiwan University (NTU), has long proposed a "Concurrent Construction Program of Losheng Sanatorium and MRT" in December, 2004. This plan not only proposes to preserve the whole area in Losheng, but let the MRT function well. It achieves the four-win situation for the historical site, the MRT, the patients in Losheng, and the HuiLong community. Also, this plan has been evaluated by the Taipei MRT bureau as "technically applicable". However, after the resignation of the whole Cabinet, no more committees were to be hold, the government commissioner in charge of this plan denied it with an official document without any negotiation, and the concurrent construction program has been put aside ever since.
In 2006, the 90% reserve plan proposed by the Council for Cultural Affairs (CCA, 文建會) was evaluate as applicable by Mott MacDonald Group. (欣陸工程顧問公司) However, the Executive Yuan turn down this proposal from CCA without any explanation in less than one month.
If we reserve Losheng sanatorium, it will not necessarily be the obstacle which hinders the MRT service. What we are upset about is the governmental monopoly of technical resources and legal rights behind the curtain, and they blame the Losheng patients for delaying the MRT. If the government keeps ignoring its flawed policy, sweeping things under the rug, and putting off its own political duty, the government will wipe out the entire historical Losheng sanatorium. Such unwise arrogance from our government only damages the rights of patients in Losheng and every citizen.
Q12. According to the Department of Rapid Transit System, Taipei (DORTS, Taipei, 台北捷運局), curved rail in the 90% plan will cause derailment, is it true?
A12: The altered curvature in 90% plan has no connection with the commuters. What the 90% plan affects is the allocation of the workshop; more specifically, the plan only changes the curvature of rails which vacant carriages may go in and out. Unless the DORTS intends to make carriages enter the workshop with a high speed, or they want some passengers to participate parties held in the workshop occasionally; otherwise security is not the issue in this plan. In fact, this is exactly why the government does not want to discuss the 90% plan openly. Besides, when Frank Chang-ting Hsieh (謝長廷) was the minister of Executive Yuan, the 90% was evaluated as an applicable plan.
Q13. According to the media and Department of Rapid Transit System, Taipei (DORTS, Taipei, 台北捷運局), the 90% preservation plan will delay the construction of MRT for two to three years and result in a two to three hundred billion NTD (approx. 760 million USD) increase in budget, is that true?
A13. In the press release issued by the Council for Cultural Affairs (CCA, 文建會) in Jan. 23, 2007, it was mentioned: "according to recent news, some local representatives and organizations in Taipei City and Taipei County claimed that the 90% Losheng preservation plan proposed by CCA will severely delay the MRT construction. Hereby CCA reiterates that the 90% preservation plan, evaluated by Hsin-Lu cooperation, will lengthen the construction period for about four months, and appends a three billion budget to it. It is not true to say the MRT construction will be delayed for two to three years."
Q14. The Losheng sanatorium has its own value to be preserved, and the human rights of the patients are also important; but what about the rights of other citizens?
A14. The Department of Rapid Transit System, Taipei (DORTS, Taipei, 台北捷運局) constantly uses phrases such as "Significant National Construction", "Asserting the Public Interests", and "One Million People's Rights of Using MRT", all of which portray the Losheng sanatorium as a troublemaker consisting of a tiny group of people, who aim at obstructing the construction of MRT. Such tactics downplay the issue of Losheng, simplifying the problem here as "the majority matters." However, we are surprised that our ruling party, who has been proud of its concern about human rights, should say such things.
If we acknowledge that the Losheng sanatorium is an important asset that not only belongs to people in Taiwan, but also to all other countries where quarantine on Hanson disease was ever imposed. The Losheng sanatorium, therefore, becomes heirloom for the entire humanity. If the Taiwanese government is willing to change its attitude and positively promote human rights, then Losheng sanatorium can not only provide another greenbelt for the citizens, but also help transform the HuiLong community into an emblem of human rights.
History repeats itself. If today we turn a deaf ear to the plights of Losheng patients, tomorrow we might ourselves experience governmental violence. In democratic countries, such as Japan, the society would usually wait till all-round plans are devised, so that the disadvantaged minority could be attended of their needs. Likewise, we urge the government in Taiwan to be responsible enough to handle the Losheng dispute with due respect to culture, history, and human rights; not only those of the patients, but also of us people.
www.coolloud.org.tw/news/database/Interface/Detailstander...
Losheng Sanatorium(Traditional Chinese: 樂生療養院; pinyin: lèshēng liáoyǎngyuàn) is a hospital for lepers, which is located in Sinjhuang, Taipei County. During 1930s, this hospital was the only public sanatorium for leprosy patients in Taiwan and also the first leprosy hospital in Taiwan.
Losheng, named Rakusei Sanatorium for Lepers of Governor-General of Taiwan (臺灣總督府癩病療養樂生院, Taiwan Sōtokufu Raibyō Rakuseiin?) originally, was built in 1929 during Japanese colonial period and served as an isolation hospital for leprosy patients at that time. The Japanese government forced leprosy patients to live in this hospital. The first 5 buildings can offer more than 100 patients.
In 2001, due to the construction of Taipei Rapid Transit System, the authorities planed of Xinzhuang (Sijhuang) Line to transform Losheng to a community hospital, thus put an end to its dedicated hospitalization and care for leprosy patients. Many students, urban planners and NGO tried to protect this sanatorium from that time.
zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%e6%a8%82%e7%94%9f%e7%99%82%e9%a4%8...
Nikon D700 + Nikkor 35-70mm.
If you were to take a short climb to the top of those steps, you would see this view to the north (almost Scotland!) on a fine day, and this view across the bird reserve to the south, through the little scratched perspex window on the inside.
LEICA MINILUX F2.4 40mm ILFORD PAN100
Q1: What kind of a place is Lo-Sheng Sanatorium?
In 1927, the General Governor of Taiwan started to build Losheng Sanatorium for the quarantine and treatment of leprosy patients. With the force of sanitary police and the medical officers, the general investigation, quarantine, and imprisonment of the leprosy patients were conducted thoroughly in the period from1934 till the end of colonial governance of Japan. As a result, Losheng Sanatorium became the institution of compulsory quarantine as well as life-long imprisonment for the leprosy patients. Now, we consider Losheng Sanatorium as the epitome of the hundred-year sanitary history in Taiwan. It is the only historical mark that can testify the epidemic prevention history of Taiwan, and it is also the best place for us to do the introspection of the human rights of the patients.
Q2: What is the Hansen's disease?
Leprosy, also called the Hansen's disease，is a chronic bacterial disease infecting the skin and nerves in the hands and feet and, in some cases, the respiratory system. In 1873, a Norwegian doctor, Hansen, discovered the pathogenesis of this disease, hence the name Hansen's disease. Leprosy virus is hard to cultivate even in the lab, so the contagiousness is extremely weak. Almost everyone (90% of the human beings) has the natural immunity against leprosy virus. Human is the main infection source of the Hansen's disease, and the upper respiratory tract is the major route of infection. The latent period is spans from three to five years, but could be as long as 40 years. The Hansen's disease is easier to spread in the environment with poor public sanitation facilities. Currently, the good sanitary condition in Taiwan ensures that the Hansen's disease almost has no contagiousness, and there is also effective cure for the disease.
Q3 Why was there a compulsory quarantine policy in the past?
At the beginning of the 20th century, because of the improvement in sanitary condition, the Hansen's disease was almost extinct in Europe and America. However, the Japanese government desired to imitate the militarism of German government, so when they faced the large amount of the domestic leprosy patients, they regarded those patients as "the national humiliation", and began to draw up "the prevention law of Leprosy "in 1907. They planned to isolate the leprosy patients from the society, trying to create the illusion in which the Hansen's disease was extinct.
Q4 What is the influence of the compulsory quarantine policy?
In order to justify its compulsory quarantine policy, the Japanese government exaggerated the contagiousness of the Hansen's disease, and propagandized it to the society with force. They educated people that leprosy was extremely horrible, and used the police force and the spy system to "arrest" the patients and put them in hospitalization. This discriminating experience of being arrested in front of their families, friends, neighbors as well as the ingrained infamy of this policy prevented the Hansen's patients from going back to the society even after the compulsory quarantine policy was relieved. It was a tragedy for those patients to have homes they dared not return to.
Q5 Why is Taiwanese government tearing down the Losheng Sanatorium？
In 1994, Taipei City's Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) System has planned to build a depot on the site where now the Sanatorium is. Chen Jing-Chuan, (陳京川) the ex-director of Losheng was opposed to this decision, and did three surveys among the patients to see what they thought and needed, shortly before he got demoted and reprimanded. Ever since then, the patients had no access to the MRT construction plans and its related discussions.
Q6 Why is it a mistake to build the depot on the Losheng site？
The MRT depot was originally planned to be built on the mountains behind Fu-Jen Catholic University(輔仁大學), but the plan was changed by local politicians. This is wrong for the following reasons:
1. Waste of money: 3/5 of the depot site needs to be built on flatland; therefore $90 million (USD) will be spent on flatting and improving the soil.
2. Disaster for the environment: What comes after flatting the mountains is a ten-story-tall retaining wall, which destroys the natural environment.
3. Safety concern: the future depot will be situated upon earth faults.
4. Ravaged historical site: the Losheng Sanatorium is an important cultural asset for people in East Asia. The depot construction will turn all this treasure into dust.
5. Ordeal for patients: the patients are forced to leave the place they spent their lives, suffering mentally and physically from the displacement.
6. Autocratic decision-making: the MRT Department never inquired the needs of Losheng patients--the 'residents' of the site—which is a violation of fundamental human rights.
Q7 Why should the Losheng Sanatorium be a World Heritage?
1. The Losheng Sanatorium has witnessed the inhumane treatment (such as discrimination and compulsory quarantine) the leprosy patients had undergone through 70 years of governmental oppression. It is a live showcase of Taiwan's colonial past, history of public health and suppressed human rights.
2. The Losheng Sanatorium is one among the few leprosy sanatoriums left. Its architecture has a mixture of Japanese and Gothic style, along with houses and Buddhist shrines built by the patients. The Sanatorium retains its painfully organised structure as an embodiment of its colonial past.
3. The Losheng Sanatorium has met many requirements for World Heritage. One UNESCO committee member who visited Losheng has commented that the Sanatorium is qualified at a World Heritage site. He mentioned one World Heritage site, the Robben Island, where Mandela was imprisoned for 27 years, to exemplify the value of human rights.
4. The international trend of cultural assets conservation emphasizes an 'organic' perspective of preserving, which means not only the architecture is preserved, but also its relationship established by people who lived in it. The Losheng Sanatorium is embedded with history and lifelong memory of the patients, therefore partial preservation would tarnish the integrity of its value. Moreover, the Losheng Sanatorium is a reminder of inhumane quarantine and mistaken political measures for the world to see. Forced displacement is nothing less than another persecution for human rights.
Q8 How does the Taiwanese government plan to settle the patients?
In 2002, the new housing projects was initiated, but instead of 'houses' which were earlier promised to the patients, the new director gave them two tall buildings with modern hospital facilities. It became clear that the new administration team intended to run a hospital business and make money. The patients had no choice but to be removed to another place designed for quarantine.
The skyscraper-ish hospital buildings were designed mainly for housing short-term patients; therefore it has inadequate space for residents to move around freely. Moreover, the hospital management team forbids the patients from bringing with them personal belongings, from cooking, and from coming over to the front building—a discriminative policy.
Q9 How are leprosy patients treated in other countries?
In 2001, the Japanese government formally apologised to the maltreated leprosy patients, and devised reimbursement laws to give them the justice and honor they long missed. Take the example of National Sanatorium Nagashima Aiseien (日本長島愛生園): it retains its old architecture and natural environment for educational purposes; the patients live in well-organised houses; intercom facilities were implemented in the sanatorium for patients who have lost their sight. Every patient has nearly two nurses to take good care of them.
Q10 How come we did not speak out in the initial stages of planning? Why stand out now?
In fact, the depot plan has received severe critiques through the decade, from scholars and social groups alike. In 1994, the Taiwanese Bureau of Health has decided the project would brutally disrupt the patients' lives, or even pose life threatens. In the same year, the Losheng residents started their perpetual war against the violence.
Long before the depot construction was initiated, Loshen's ex-director and history professionals have demanded a large-scale inspection of Losheng's position as a historical site. The scholars appealed to the MRT Department that they should spare the Losheng Sanatorium, while they unanimously agreed the entire site should be preserved. However, the officials were rough enough to terminate the process of inspection, and decided the Sanatorium should be torn down entirely.
It was not until 2004, when Prof. John K.C. Liu (劉可強教授) came up with a symbiosis plan, and when the Concil of Cultural Affairs (文建會) has deemed the Sanatorium a historical spot, that the MRT Department was pressured to rethink the possibilities of preservation.
We sincerely appeal to the governmental officials that they should take the problems seriously. People have eyes to see and ears to listen; we will not be fooled or threatened for life.
Q11. Will MRT Shin-Jhong line not able to function if Losheng sanatorium is not torn down?
A11: Liu, Ko-Chiang, a professor in the Graduate Institute of Building and Planning in National Taiwan University (NTU), has long proposed a "Concurrent Construction Program of Losheng Sanatorium and MRT" in December, 2004. This plan not only proposes to preserve the whole area in Losheng, but let the MRT function well. It achieves the four-win situation for the historical site, the MRT, the patients in Losheng, and the HuiLong community. Also, this plan has been evaluated by the Taipei MRT bureau as "technically applicable". However, after the resignation of the whole Cabinet, no more committees were to be hold, the government commissioner in charge of this plan denied it with an official document without any negotiation, and the concurrent construction program has been put aside ever since.
In 2006, the 90% reserve plan proposed by the Council for Cultural Affairs (CCA, 文建會) was evaluate as applicable by Mott MacDonald Group. (欣陸工程顧問公司) However, the Executive Yuan turn down this proposal from CCA without any explanation in less than one month.
If we reserve Losheng sanatorium, it will not necessarily be the obstacle which hinders the MRT service. What we are upset about is the governmental monopoly of technical resources and legal rights behind the curtain, and they blame the Losheng patients for delaying the MRT. If the government keeps ignoring its flawed policy, sweeping things under the rug, and putting off its own political duty, the government will wipe out the entire historical Losheng sanatorium. Such unwise arrogance from our government only damages the rights of patients in Losheng and every citizen.
Q12. According to the Department of Rapid Transit System, Taipei (DORTS, Taipei, 台北捷運局), curved rail in the 90% plan will cause derailment, is it true?
A12: The altered curvature in 90% plan has no connection with the commuters. What the 90% plan affects is the allocation of the workshop; more specifically, the plan only changes the curvature of rails which vacant carriages may go in and out. Unless the DORTS intends to make carriages enter the workshop with a high speed, or they want some passengers to participate parties held in the workshop occasionally; otherwise security is not the issue in this plan. In fact, this is exactly why the government does not want to discuss the 90% plan openly. Besides, when Frank Chang-ting Hsieh (謝長廷) was the minister of Executive Yuan, the 90% was evaluated as an applicable plan.
Q13. According to the media and Department of Rapid Transit System, Taipei (DORTS, Taipei, 台北捷運局), the 90% preservation plan will delay the construction of MRT for two to three years and result in a two to three hundred billion NTD (approx. 760 million USD) increase in budget, is that true?
A13. In the press release issued by the Council for Cultural Affairs (CCA, 文建會) in Jan. 23, 2007, it was mentioned: "according to recent news, some local representatives and organizations in Taipei City and Taipei County claimed that the 90% Losheng preservation plan proposed by CCA will severely delay the MRT construction. Hereby CCA reiterates that the 90% preservation plan, evaluated by Hsin-Lu cooperation, will lengthen the construction period for about four months, and appends a three billion budget to it. It is not true to say the MRT construction will be delayed for two to three years."
Q14. The Losheng sanatorium has its own value to be preserved, and the human rights of the patients are also important; but what about the rights of other citizens?
A14. The Department of Rapid Transit System, Taipei (DORTS, Taipei, 台北捷運局) constantly uses phrases such as "Significant National Construction", "Asserting the Public Interests", and "One Million People's Rights of Using MRT", all of which portray the Losheng sanatorium as a troublemaker consisting of a tiny group of people, who aim at obstructing the construction of MRT. Such tactics downplay the issue of Losheng, simplifying the problem here as "the majority matters." However, we are surprised that our ruling party, who has been proud of its concern about human rights, should say such things.
If we acknowledge that the Losheng sanatorium is an important asset that not only belongs to people in Taiwan, but also to all other countries where quarantine on Hanson disease was ever imposed. The Losheng sanatorium, therefore, becomes heirloom for the entire humanity. If the Taiwanese government is willing to change its attitude and positively promote human rights, then Losheng sanatorium can not only provide another greenbelt for the citizens, but also help transform the HuiLong community into an emblem of human rights.
History repeats itself. If today we turn a deaf ear to the plights of Losheng patients, tomorrow we might ourselves experience governmental violence. In democratic countries, such as Japan, the society would usually wait till all-round plans are devised, so that the disadvantaged minority could be attended of their needs. Likewise, we urge the government in Taiwan to be responsible enough to handle the Losheng dispute with due respect to culture, history, and human rights; not only those of the patients, but also of us people.
www.coolloud.org.tw/news/database/Interface/Detailstander...
Losheng Sanatorium(Traditional Chinese: 樂生療養院; pinyin: lèshēng liáoyǎngyuàn) is a hospital for lepers, which is located in Sinjhuang, Taipei County. During 1930s, this hospital was the only public sanatorium for leprosy patients in Taiwan and also the first leprosy hospital in Taiwan.
Losheng, named Rakusei Sanatorium for Lepers of Governor-General of Taiwan (臺灣總督府癩病療養樂生院, Taiwan Sōtokufu Raibyō Rakuseiin?) originally, was built in 1929 during Japanese colonial period and served as an isolation hospital for leprosy patients at that time. The Japanese government forced leprosy patients to live in this hospital. The first 5 buildings can offer more than 100 patients.
In 2001, due to the construction of Taipei Rapid Transit System, the authorities planed of Xinzhuang (Sijhuang) Line to transform Losheng to a community hospital, thus put an end to its dedicated hospitalization and care for leprosy patients. Many students, urban planners and NGO tried to protect this sanatorium from that time.
zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%e6%a8%82%e7%94%9f%e7%99%82%e9%a4%8...
The D.T. Suzuki Museum in Kanazawa is a serene architectural masterpiece dedicated to the life and philosophy of Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki, a Zen Buddhist scholar who introduced Zen to the Western world. Designed by renowned Japanese architect Tadao Ando, the museum exemplifies the harmony between modern minimalism and traditional Japanese aesthetics.
Set against a lush backdrop of seasonal greenery, the museum’s clean lines and reflective water features evoke a sense of tranquility and introspection. The exterior façade, captured here, showcases Ando’s signature use of concrete, light, and shadow. Vertical louvers on the wall add texture and create a dynamic interplay with sunlight throughout the day, while the meticulously placed steps and subtle guiding paths provide a seamless transition between nature and structure.
Visitors are invited to engage with Suzuki’s legacy through the museum’s three interconnected spaces: the Entrance Wing, Exhibition Space, and the Contemplative Space. The architectural design encourages mindfulness, with framed views of the surrounding gardens and a meditative water mirror that reflects both the sky and the soul. The subdued color palette and tactile materials create a profound sense of stillness, making the museum a destination for both art and philosophy enthusiasts.
This minimalist sanctuary offers a modern interpretation of Zen principles, blending simplicity with depth. While the museum is a tribute to Suzuki’s teachings, its design invites each visitor to embark on their own personal journey of reflection and discovery. Located just a short walk from Kenrokuen Garden, the D.T. Suzuki Museum is a must-visit for those seeking both architectural inspiration and spiritual peace in Kanazawa.
You don't know how you move me
Deconstruct me
And consume me
I'm all used up
I'm out of luck
I am starstruck
By something in your eyes that is keeping my hope alive
But I'm sick of myself when I look at you
Something is beautiful and true
In a world that's ugly and a lie
It's hard to even want to try
And I'm beginning to think baby you don't know
I'll take or leave
The room to breathe
The choice to leave you
I'll throw away
A chance at greatness
Just to make this
Dream come into play, I don't know if I'll find a way
'cause I'm sick of myself when I look at you
Something is beautiful and true
In a world that's ugly and a lie
It's hard to even want to try
And I'm beginning to think baby you don't know
I'm beginning to think baby you don't know
There's something in your eyes that is keeping my hope alive
But I'm sick of myself when I look at you
Something is beautiful and true
In a world that's ugly and a lie
It's hard to even want to try
And I'm beginning to think baby you don't know
I'm beginning to think baby you don't know
Nikon D4 | Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm ƒ/1.8G | 1/6400th sec | ƒ/1.8 | ISO-100
Wow. Wow. Wow. First shot with the Nikon D4 and the new Nikon AF-S NIkkor 28mm ƒ/1.8G. What a lens! As for the camera, the D4 is amazing; will it replace our D3s? I'll get back to you on that.
The D.T. Suzuki Museum in Kanazawa, Japan, is a tranquil sanctuary that pays homage to Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki, a scholar who profoundly influenced the understanding of Zen Buddhism in the Western world. The museum's Contemplative Space, shown here, embodies the Zen philosophy of mindfulness, balance, and simplicity. Designed by Tadao Ando, one of Japan’s most celebrated architects, this space integrates minimalist architecture with serene natural elements, creating an environment that encourages deep introspection.
The structure’s stark white walls are framed by a shallow reflective pool that mirrors the sky, trees, and architectural lines, blurring the boundaries between nature and the built environment. Ando’s use of clean geometry, concrete, and light invites visitors to focus on the essential—what lies beyond the material. The Contemplative Space is particularly notable for its interplay of openness and enclosure, with a single open doorway offering a framed view of the water and greenery, further emphasizing the Zen principle of awareness in the present moment.
Seasonal shifts enhance the experience, as autumn’s fiery foliage or spring’s cherry blossoms provide a dynamic, living canvas surrounding the museum. Inside, the space remains minimal yet purposeful, with wooden benches inviting quiet reflection. The seamless integration of architecture and landscape transforms this site into more than just a museum; it becomes a meditative retreat.
Situated near Kanazawa’s renowned Kenrokuen Garden, the D.T. Suzuki Museum offers a holistic experience for those seeking to connect with Zen ideals through architecture, history, and nature. Visitors leave with a deeper appreciation for Suzuki’s teachings and the transformative power of simplicity.
Nick Biello-Nick has shared the stage with world-class artists, such as Slide Hampton, Cedar Walton, Rich Perry, Harvie S, John Benitez, Steve Davis, Barry Ries, Loren Stillman, Ingrid Jensen, Victor Bailey, Jovino Santos Nieto, Jaimoe Johnson (Allman Brothers), and Joe Beck, of Miles Davis fame. He has performed at the Pescara Jazz Festival and Bussi Jazz Festival in Italy, as well as the Litchfield Jazz Festival, the New Haven Jazz Festival, and the Blaine Jazz Festival. His studies with alto saxophone master Jackie McLean enriched him with the deepest appreciation for the jazz tradition. He has also studied with George Garzone, Steve Wilson, David Liebman, and Phil Markowitz. In demand as a composer and arranger, Nicholas has written arrangements that have been performed by world-class artists such as Stevie Wonder, Dave Koz, and Kelly Rowland. His work has been televised on networks such as ABC and ESPN, and heard in venues in Las Vegas, L.A., and New York City.
Won Merit Award at the Professional Photographers of the Palm Beaches competition in Florida June2015
Protected by laws and may not be downloaded, without my written explicit permission. All rights reserved. Copyright 2015@Henri LouIs Hirschfeld
Is this the right time, it must be my time
I think the right time for me...
Is this the right time, it must be my time
I know the right time for me...
In the hush between shadow and flame,
a woman lifts her gaze as if recalling the sun—
not the star itself, but the warmth it once promised.
Light slips across her skin like a memory made visible,
half mercy, half revelation.
In that amber hush, the world seems to pause—
and the darkness, too, begins to listen.
Oil on canvas; 101.6 x 76.5 cm.
Mark Rothko, original name Marcus Rothkovitch, American painter whose works introduced contemplative introspection into the melodramatic post-World War II Abstract Expressionist school; his use of colour as the sole means of expression led to the development of Colour Field Painting.
In 1913 Rothko’s family emigrated from Russia to the U.S., where they settled in Portland, Ore. During his youth he was preoccupied with politics and social issues. He entered Yale University in 1921, intending to become a labour leader, but dropped out after two years and wandered about the U.S. In 1925 he settled in New York City and took up painting. Although he studied briefly under the painter Max Weber, he was essentially self-taught.
Rothko first worked in a realistic style that culminated in his Subway series of the late 1930s, showing the loneliness of persons in drab urban environments. This gave way in the early 1940s to the semi-abstract biomorphic forms of the ritualistic Baptismal Scene (1945). By 1948, however, he had arrived at a highly personal form of Abstract Expressionism. Unlike many of his fellow Abstract Expressionists, Rothko never relied on such dramatic techniques as violent brushstrokes or the dripping and splattering of paint. Instead, his virtually gestureless paintings achieved their effects by juxtaposing large areas of melting colours that seemingly float parallel to the picture plane in an indeterminate, atmospheric space.
Rothko spent the rest of his life refining this basic style through continuous simplification. He restricted his designs to two or three “soft-edged” rectangles that nearly filled the wall-sized vertical formats like monumental abstract icons. Despite their large size, however, his paintings derived a remarkable sense of intimacy from the play of nuances within local colour.
From 1958 to 1966 Rothko worked intermittently on a series of 14 immense canvases (the largest was about 11 × 15 feet [3 × 5 metres]) eventually placed in a nondenominational chapel in Houston, Texas, called, after his death, the Rothko Chapel. These paintings were virtual monochromes of darkly glowing browns, maroons, reds, and blacks. Their sombre intensity reveals the deep mysticism of Rothko’s later years. Plagued by ill health and the conviction that he had been forgotten by those artists who had learned most from his painting, he committed suicide.
After his death, the execution of Rothko’s will provoked one of the most spectacular and complex court cases in the history of modern art, lasting for 11 years (1972–82). The misanthropic Rothko had hoarded his works, numbering 798 paintings, as well as many sketches and drawings. His daughter, Kate Rothko, accused the executors of the estate (Bernard J. Reis, Theodoros Stamos, and Morton Levine) and Frank Lloyd, owner of Marlborough Galleries in New York City, of conspiracy and conflict of interest in selling the works—in effect, of enriching themselves. The courts decided against the executors and Lloyd, who were heavily fined. Lloyd was tried separately and convicted on criminal charges of tampering with evidence. In 1979 a new board of the Mark Rothko Foundation was established, and all the works in the estate were divided between the artist’s two children and the Foundation. In 1984 the Foundation’s share of works was distributed to 19 museums in the United States, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Israel; the best and the largest proportion went to the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
Special philosophic-briar-patch alert: If you're here for the geology or natural history only, stop reading after the first unitalicized paragraph to avoid a toxic dose of authorial introspection.
Taken in the same place as Part 7 of this set, but from a slightly different angle. And still looking southwestward at a small canyon of a Tornillo Creek tributary. Here at Carlota Tinaja we're about 6.9 road mi / 11.1 road km north of the intersection of Old Ore Road and Park Road 12.
To briefly review what I mentioned in the previous post, the artfully stratified stone belongs to the Upper Cretaceous Boquillas Formation. It's composed of alternating beds of limestone and various kinds of mudstone, each representing a separate pulse of sedimentation near a margin of the Western Interior Seaway. In those days, that great body of saltwater bisected North America from the Arctic all the way to what will always be known to the non-idiotic as the Gulf of Mexico.
And now I'm going to do something unforgiveable by speaking primarily to myself about my own reaction to this photo: it has always triggered in me particularly intense associations with the blessed day I stood in this spot and took it.
I remember feeling a flood of awe and curiosity and calmness that cannot possibly be related, in word or image, to any other person. I was standing in the midst of so much sheer geologic beauty, so much monumental stillness, so much rock carefully arranged by unconscious processes. No human-derived landscape has ever been half so uncontrived or perfect.
There is that experience of four-dimensional immersion in the real that only deserts offer. In that stark and arid world there is the overwhelming impression that the only way to avoid delusion is to sense the legendary nature of everything.
At least that's what this kind of place, and this kind of picture, do for me. But as noted before, it's a lesson that can't be imprinted on others. Still, in the heart of this old agnostic Gnostic the memory of having been there, at Carlota Tinaja, says something like this:
Rejoice evermore.
Pray without ceasing.
In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.
Quench not the Spirit.
Lest I get slapped with a plagiarism suit from the Heavenly Choir, let me note that this is 1 Thessalonians 5:16-19, straight up. I was raised on the King James Version, so there you have it, in good Jacobean prose.
To see the other photos and descriptions in this set, visit my my Integrative Natural History of Old Ore Road album.
Watercolor and ink on paper; 38.1 x 53.7 cm.
Mark Rothko, original name Marcus Rothkovitch, American painter whose works introduced contemplative introspection into the melodramatic post-World War II Abstract Expressionist school; his use of colour as the sole means of expression led to the development of Colour Field Painting.
In 1913 Rothko’s family emigrated from Russia to the U.S., where they settled in Portland, Ore. During his youth he was preoccupied with politics and social issues. He entered Yale University in 1921, intending to become a labour leader, but dropped out after two years and wandered about the U.S. In 1925 he settled in New York City and took up painting. Although he studied briefly under the painter Max Weber, he was essentially self-taught.
Rothko first worked in a realistic style that culminated in his Subway series of the late 1930s, showing the loneliness of persons in drab urban environments. This gave way in the early 1940s to the semi-abstract biomorphic forms of the ritualistic Baptismal Scene (1945). By 1948, however, he had arrived at a highly personal form of Abstract Expressionism. Unlike many of his fellow Abstract Expressionists, Rothko never relied on such dramatic techniques as violent brushstrokes or the dripping and splattering of paint. Instead, his virtually gestureless paintings achieved their effects by juxtaposing large areas of melting colours that seemingly float parallel to the picture plane in an indeterminate, atmospheric space.
Rothko spent the rest of his life refining this basic style through continuous simplification. He restricted his designs to two or three “soft-edged” rectangles that nearly filled the wall-sized vertical formats like monumental abstract icons. Despite their large size, however, his paintings derived a remarkable sense of intimacy from the play of nuances within local colour.
From 1958 to 1966 Rothko worked intermittently on a series of 14 immense canvases (the largest was about 11 × 15 feet [3 × 5 metres]) eventually placed in a nondenominational chapel in Houston, Texas, called, after his death, the Rothko Chapel. These paintings were virtual monochromes of darkly glowing browns, maroons, reds, and blacks. Their sombre intensity reveals the deep mysticism of Rothko’s later years. Plagued by ill health and the conviction that he had been forgotten by those artists who had learned most from his painting, he committed suicide.
After his death, the execution of Rothko’s will provoked one of the most spectacular and complex court cases in the history of modern art, lasting for 11 years (1972–82). The misanthropic Rothko had hoarded his works, numbering 798 paintings, as well as many sketches and drawings. His daughter, Kate Rothko, accused the executors of the estate (Bernard J. Reis, Theodoros Stamos, and Morton Levine) and Frank Lloyd, owner of Marlborough Galleries in New York City, of conspiracy and conflict of interest in selling the works—in effect, of enriching themselves. The courts decided against the executors and Lloyd, who were heavily fined. Lloyd was tried separately and convicted on criminal charges of tampering with evidence. In 1979 a new board of the Mark Rothko Foundation was established, and all the works in the estate were divided between the artist’s two children and the Foundation. In 1984 the Foundation’s share of works was distributed to 19 museums in the United States, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Israel; the best and the largest proportion went to the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
A3, 2018
Just as introspection is important, reflecting long and hard on that introspection is important so as to know oneself and move ever forward, striving to better oneself.
Visit my blog:
moiretallegiere.wordpress.com/
Check out my youtubechannel:
www.youtube.com/channel/UC3IaCxAXE3pQd7PCdvHoaaA
Check out my bitchutechannel:
www.bitchute.com/channel/EvbGZyTZSraY/
Wanna buy my books?
Stalk me on social media (as long as it lasts):
twatter:
Gab:
Minds:
Pen and ink on paper; 28.1 x 21.8 cm.
Mark Rothko, original name Marcus Rothkovitch, American painter whose works introduced contemplative introspection into the melodramatic post-World War II Abstract Expressionist school; his use of colour as the sole means of expression led to the development of Colour Field Painting.
In 1913 Rothko’s family emigrated from Russia to the U.S., where they settled in Portland, Ore. During his youth he was preoccupied with politics and social issues. He entered Yale University in 1921, intending to become a labour leader, but dropped out after two years and wandered about the U.S. In 1925 he settled in New York City and took up painting. Although he studied briefly under the painter Max Weber, he was essentially self-taught.
Rothko first worked in a realistic style that culminated in his Subway series of the late 1930s, showing the loneliness of persons in drab urban environments. This gave way in the early 1940s to the semi-abstract biomorphic forms of the ritualistic Baptismal Scene (1945). By 1948, however, he had arrived at a highly personal form of Abstract Expressionism. Unlike many of his fellow Abstract Expressionists, Rothko never relied on such dramatic techniques as violent brushstrokes or the dripping and splattering of paint. Instead, his virtually gestureless paintings achieved their effects by juxtaposing large areas of melting colours that seemingly float parallel to the picture plane in an indeterminate, atmospheric space.
Rothko spent the rest of his life refining this basic style through continuous simplification. He restricted his designs to two or three “soft-edged” rectangles that nearly filled the wall-sized vertical formats like monumental abstract icons. Despite their large size, however, his paintings derived a remarkable sense of intimacy from the play of nuances within local colour.
From 1958 to 1966 Rothko worked intermittently on a series of 14 immense canvases (the largest was about 11 × 15 feet [3 × 5 metres]) eventually placed in a nondenominational chapel in Houston, Texas, called, after his death, the Rothko Chapel. These paintings were virtual monochromes of darkly glowing browns, maroons, reds, and blacks. Their sombre intensity reveals the deep mysticism of Rothko’s later years. Plagued by ill health and the conviction that he had been forgotten by those artists who had learned most from his painting, he committed suicide.
After his death, the execution of Rothko’s will provoked one of the most spectacular and complex court cases in the history of modern art, lasting for 11 years (1972–82). The misanthropic Rothko had hoarded his works, numbering 798 paintings, as well as many sketches and drawings. His daughter, Kate Rothko, accused the executors of the estate (Bernard J. Reis, Theodoros Stamos, and Morton Levine) and Frank Lloyd, owner of Marlborough Galleries in New York City, of conspiracy and conflict of interest in selling the works—in effect, of enriching themselves. The courts decided against the executors and Lloyd, who were heavily fined. Lloyd was tried separately and convicted on criminal charges of tampering with evidence. In 1979 a new board of the Mark Rothko Foundation was established, and all the works in the estate were divided between the artist’s two children and the Foundation. In 1984 the Foundation’s share of works was distributed to 19 museums in the United States, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Israel; the best and the largest proportion went to the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
© 2012 Eric Adeleye Photography. (Press "L" for a larger view of the photograph)
Project 365 Archives. This is another photograph that didn't make the cut for my selection for day 051/365. I really got some good shots off that day experimenting with off camera flash and Nikon CLS. Below is the setup information for each portion of the final composite photograph. Post processing was done in Adobe Photoshop CS5. I got the idea for this photograph from the cover of one of my books, Black Man Emerging.
1. Super close-up of my face. Shot with Nikon D200, SB-700 flash off camera and triggered using Nikon CLS, Westcott 43" umbrella, Aperture: f/5.6, Shutter: 1/2500sec, ISO: 100
2. Smaller shot of my face. Shot with Nikon D200, SB-700 flash off camera and triggered using Nikon CLS, Westcott 43" umbrella, Aperture: f/4.5, Shutter: 1/3200sec, ISO: 100
Oil on canvas; 91.4 x 61 cm.
Mark Rothko, original name Marcus Rothkovitch, American painter whose works introduced contemplative introspection into the melodramatic post-World War II Abstract Expressionist school; his use of colour as the sole means of expression led to the development of Colour Field Painting.
In 1913 Rothko’s family emigrated from Russia to the U.S., where they settled in Portland, Ore. During his youth he was preoccupied with politics and social issues. He entered Yale University in 1921, intending to become a labour leader, but dropped out after two years and wandered about the U.S. In 1925 he settled in New York City and took up painting. Although he studied briefly under the painter Max Weber, he was essentially self-taught.
Rothko first worked in a realistic style that culminated in his Subway series of the late 1930s, showing the loneliness of persons in drab urban environments. This gave way in the early 1940s to the semi-abstract biomorphic forms of the ritualistic Baptismal Scene (1945). By 1948, however, he had arrived at a highly personal form of Abstract Expressionism. Unlike many of his fellow Abstract Expressionists, Rothko never relied on such dramatic techniques as violent brushstrokes or the dripping and splattering of paint. Instead, his virtually gestureless paintings achieved their effects by juxtaposing large areas of melting colours that seemingly float parallel to the picture plane in an indeterminate, atmospheric space.
Rothko spent the rest of his life refining this basic style through continuous simplification. He restricted his designs to two or three “soft-edged” rectangles that nearly filled the wall-sized vertical formats like monumental abstract icons. Despite their large size, however, his paintings derived a remarkable sense of intimacy from the play of nuances within local colour.
From 1958 to 1966 Rothko worked intermittently on a series of 14 immense canvases (the largest was about 11 × 15 feet [3 × 5 metres]) eventually placed in a nondenominational chapel in Houston, Texas, called, after his death, the Rothko Chapel. These paintings were virtual monochromes of darkly glowing browns, maroons, reds, and blacks. Their sombre intensity reveals the deep mysticism of Rothko’s later years. Plagued by ill health and the conviction that he had been forgotten by those artists who had learned most from his painting, he committed suicide.
After his death, the execution of Rothko’s will provoked one of the most spectacular and complex court cases in the history of modern art, lasting for 11 years (1972–82). The misanthropic Rothko had hoarded his works, numbering 798 paintings, as well as many sketches and drawings. His daughter, Kate Rothko, accused the executors of the estate (Bernard J. Reis, Theodoros Stamos, and Morton Levine) and Frank Lloyd, owner of Marlborough Galleries in New York City, of conspiracy and conflict of interest in selling the works—in effect, of enriching themselves. The courts decided against the executors and Lloyd, who were heavily fined. Lloyd was tried separately and convicted on criminal charges of tampering with evidence. In 1979 a new board of the Mark Rothko Foundation was established, and all the works in the estate were divided between the artist’s two children and the Foundation. In 1984 the Foundation’s share of works was distributed to 19 museums in the United States, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Israel; the best and the largest proportion went to the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
You can really see that 75mm f1.8 focus in action on this one! That's some UH-maze-ing detail!
© Web-Betty: digital heart, analog soul
The Great Mosque of Xi’an is renowned as the largest and best preserved mosque in China. Founded in the 8th century, it serves over 60,000 Chinese Muslims. It architecture is a blend of Chinese and Islamic cultures. This octagonal three-storeyed pagoda, sometimes called the Pavilion for Introspection, acts as the minaret of the mosque.