the Bronte sisters Porn book

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

The recently discovered pornographic portraits painted of the Bronte sisters by their brother Bramwell are pretty hot in their own way. What do you guys think?

― Paul Kelly, Wednesday, 29 October 2003 07:33 (twenty-two years ago)

er, please explain?

― the surface noise (electricsound), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 07:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh, sorry, I'm still asleep. I thought this was about that book where some ghost writer did "fan fiction" stories writing in all the dirty bits of Jane Austen novels. You'll never look at Mr. D'Arcy the same way again!

(I wish I could have read more of it, but it was at Suzy's.)

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 08:53 (twenty-two years ago)

The Bronte sisters were hot? 'cause that portrait at the NPG suggests differently...

― Catty (Catty), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 11:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Do you have a link for this?

I had a pint in the Black Bull in Haworth once. It's what Branwell would have expected of me.

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 11:41 (twenty-two years ago)

this is disturbing on so many levels

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:15 (twenty-two years ago)

why does the new power generation have a portrait of the brontes?

― mohammed abba (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:16 (twenty-two years ago)

yes link please.

absurdity.

― A Girl Named Sam (thatgirl), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Have none of you Americans actually heard of the National Portrait Gallery or are you just being "funny"? Wot, with that fabled American humour we've heard so much about!

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Portrait painted by the brother, who wasn't that talented, so they may have been ravishing but he made them look like mingers. Or he may have made them look like mingers through jealousy and rage.

http://www.empirezine.com/deadpoets/sept-bronte.jpg

― Madchen (Madchen), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:38 (twenty-two years ago)

The weird yellowy bit was originally a portrait of Branwell. He painted himself out for some reason. Was probably off his tits on opium.

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:40 (twenty-two years ago)

http://rushmore.shootangle.com/academy/images/richie_frame_l.jpg

"...he had failed to advance as an artist..."

― ModJ (ModJ), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh, god. I HAVE to see this. I was totally obsessed with the Brontes growing up. I always imagined them as being very plain looking, like most of the portraits I've seen. You know, a bunch of Jane Eyres. The yellow in madchen's pic looks ghostly.

― Sarah McLusky (coco), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:45 (twenty-two years ago)

I wish that the pictures showed in my thread, but their filtered.

FOR GODS SAKE, WHY FILTER THE NPG!?!?! WHAT COULD POSSIBLY BE SO EEEEEVIL TO THE NHS ABOUT LOOKING AT ART?!?!?

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:49 (twenty-two years ago)

In answer to the original question, I think this is a wind up, btw.

― Madchen (Madchen), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Never. Next you'll be saying Wuthering Heights was a book before the song.

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:02 (twenty-two years ago)

I want to find the book that "China in your Hand" was based on.

― Mark C (Mark C), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:03 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh I've seen the NPG portrait. But last time I there the girls were clothed in the painting. Has this now changed?

― A Girl Named Sam (thatgirl), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:07 (twenty-two years ago)

that yellow blot is where the artist formerly known as the artist formerly known as prince was before Warner Brothers erased him.

― Catty (Catty), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:08 (twenty-two years ago)

Obviously it is a haunted painting. They strip sometimes.

― Sarah McLusky (coco), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:08 (twenty-two years ago)

I was just being nice because I thought somebody might not have realised. In future I will be mean and nasty to you all.

― Madchen (Madchen), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:08 (twenty-two years ago)

― Catty (Catty), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Dude, that has actual naked ladies, yet it's not filtered. I don't get my workplace.

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Um, wow, Catty.
What a find.

― Sarah McLUsky (coco), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:15 (twenty-two years ago)

It's got actual naked ladies and naked gents and naked LESBIANS!

― Catty (Catty), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:17 (twenty-two years ago)

oh, and a link to a russian ecommerce bride service...

― Catty (Catty), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:17 (twenty-two years ago)

OH MY GOD, MY EYES, I'M AT WORK!!!

(Is it me or are their willies really red? Or is that Victorian DISEASE?!?!?)

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:18 (twenty-two years ago)

it's from the lye in the soap when they tried to clean their foreskins?
that's just a guess.

― Catty (Catty), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:20 (twenty-two years ago)

haha dig the bishop in Y!

― teeny (teeny), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:30 (twenty-two years ago)

And a nun in V! I have GOT to send HSA this link!

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Obviously it is a haunted painting. They strip sometimes.

excellent!

― A Girl Named Sam (thatgirl), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:33 (twenty-two years ago)

HSA will *love* this link. maybe he needs to be bribed and in exchange for the link he is tied to a chair and threatened with a tooth drill. "Is it safe? Is it safe?"

― Catty (Catty), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Catty, you have just made my day. How did 'S' get in that position, though? Wouldn't that hurt the woman's back?

― Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:51 (twenty-two years ago)

oh my god I thought the thread title said "the Bronte sisters Porn look"

― s1utsky (slutsky), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 17:20 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.