charlie_cochrane: (old time winter)
charlie_cochrane ([personal profile] charlie_cochrane) wrote2013-02-05 12:25 pm

And now we see 'the face'

Stunning facial reconstruction of Richard III. Too easy to make daft comments like "very modern looking" so I won't.

[identity profile] marasmine.livejournal.com 2013-02-05 04:39 pm (UTC)(link)
I watched the documentary last night with only a few rude comments. He was a good looking man. You reminded me that I wanted to check what happened to his wife and son and I found the basic details - both died before Richard. Saved Henry Tudor some trouble.

[identity profile] charliecochrane.livejournal.com 2013-02-06 08:43 am (UTC)(link)
Oh yes. Would have been another difficult thing to 'sort out'.

[identity profile] elin-gregory.livejournal.com 2013-02-05 05:32 pm (UTC)(link)
In't he like his picture?

I remember Caroline Wilkinson's early work for Chronicle, where all her subjects had her own nose, but she's doing brilliant now.

[identity profile] charliecochrane.livejournal.com 2013-02-06 08:47 am (UTC)(link)
That nose and chin are pretty distinctive.

I see they're look for Alfred the Great, now. I guess the presence of burnt cakes will be the deal clincher.

[identity profile] helenajust.livejournal.com 2013-02-05 07:20 pm (UTC)(link)
I wish the presenter of last night's programme had done even a little research before he started - his ignorance was shameful, especially given that he must have known that he was meeting a serious member of the Richard III Society. All he had to do was spend an hour on their website!

They could have used some of the time he wasted doing Shakespeare in telling us some of the basic facts - such as the reasons given at the time for Richard's becoming king in place of his nephew, and who benefitted most from the disappearance of the Princes (he or Henry Tudor). But the science was good; I wondered why they didn't do the carbon dating first, as if that was in the wrong ballpark they wouldn't have needed to do the rest (maybe they did, and the programme showed it out of sequence).

And I liked the reconstruction - having seen her work before, I trust the person who did it. Josephine Tey's Alan Grant would have had the same reaction to it as he did to the portrait, I think!

[identity profile] charliecochrane.livejournal.com 2013-02-06 08:50 am (UTC)(link)
I didn't watch it - glad I made that decision, now. I get very angry with half baked presenters. Glad the science was good, as that's the bit I usually rant at.

The problem I've found with any books about that era is they're always written with a bias, pro or anti Richard, so as a poor humble biologist I can't tell if I'm being given a fair report.

[identity profile] anteros-lmc.livejournal.com 2013-02-05 09:34 pm (UTC)(link)
It's Lord Farquaad!

I'm sorry, I'll get me coat....

[identity profile] charliecochrane.livejournal.com 2013-02-06 08:44 am (UTC)(link)
LOL It is! BTW Have you noticed how old Dimitri Swarzewski (no idea if I speled that correctly) looks just like Prince Charming from same films?

[identity profile] charliecochrane.livejournal.com 2013-02-07 10:55 am (UTC)(link)
And as recommended above, look up old Dimitri and compare him to Prince Charming. Even the sweep of the hair's the same.

[identity profile] anteros-lmc.livejournal.com 2013-02-08 09:59 pm (UTC)(link)
ROFL! Dimitri so is Prince Charming! Now....who's Shrek and who's Princess Fiona? XD

[identity profile] charliecochrane.livejournal.com 2013-02-08 10:00 pm (UTC)(link)
Shrek is Wayne Rooney. Any votes for Fiona?