Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

HeavilyEnvy t1_j1qm62u wrote

‟Noh time fur that” - rower #2 as Jon steps into his lap

1

VaMoInNj t1_j1qofdo wrote

This painting is bullshit. I was there the other week, there’s a flipping bridge.

24

rossdowdell t1_j1qoj7h wrote

If the Ewoks didn't help disable that force field, this event would have been futile.

Yet, there isn't one fucking Muppet in this portrait.

5

vakr001 t1_j1qp47v wrote

I read up on this attack the other day. Pure genius, especially getting the enemy drunk.

15

THP_music t1_j1qso0p wrote

when you go to the actual Crossing and see how narrow it is you will understand that this is way hyped.

−5

beeatenbyagrue t1_j1qtr3s wrote

This boat would have sunk under the weight of Chris Christie.

39

PAXICHEN t1_j1r8wbl wrote

I grew up south of the crossing…in Trenton. So when I look at this painting I’m picturing myself looking from Trenton toward Washington’s Crossing and it appears to me he’s having the Marbleheaders row him back to PA.

4

derekno2go t1_j1rkjju wrote

I like the old A&E movie with Jeff Daniel's as Washington. It sorta sympathized with the Hessians at end when they note many of them would continue to live in the United States after the war.

1

jarrettbrown t1_j1runmw wrote

It's huge and no one ever really goes to see it. As a member of the Met, there has been time where I was the only one in that gallery and it's surreal.

Also, fact of the day: The river isn't the Delaware, it's actually based off a river in Europe. The Delaware doesn't get chunks that large around that time.

8

imironman2018 t1_j1ruz9n wrote

little did I know that GW was crossing over the Delwaware River into NJ to fight at Trenton. I always thought it was in another state.

Fun fact, Washington's second crossing back to Pennsylvannia was even more treacherous because his men raided the Hessian supplies/rum and were drunk. they kept falling into the icy waters and had to be fished out.

9

Wandego t1_j1u0806 wrote

> Colonel Henry Knox, who commanded Washington’s artillery, described the crossing in a letter to his wife on December 28: “Floating ice in the river made the labor almost incredible…Night was cold and stormy; it hailed with great violence.”

2

syncomatic_columbia t1_j1u1fcq wrote

Arguably this battle at Trenton is the better turning point of the war than Saratoga which was the next battle At this time the continental army was losing bad and hard most of the time, given they were fighting the British empire as a bunch of random dudes. So morale was really low and Washington was a few weeks away from not having an army at all. This battle was such a victory, a sneak attack on Christmas against a bunch of drunk Germans, that it reinvigorated the continental army to keep fighting which brought them onto Saratoga where they were able to secure French support and the rest is history

2

syncomatic_columbia t1_j1u1zlv wrote

I think we can accept some things about history and historical figures while denouncing others given our modern perspective. There will probably be things about our Era future people will think it's bullshit or stupid. I'm not defending slavery at all, but the reality is slavery was intertwined into the American economy and that's why we needed a civil war to get rid of it. That was almost 100 years later from this crossing... at this time virtually nobody thought slavery was bad and frankly they had bigger fish to fry evidently. We can accept none of these people were on a high moral standing re: slavery while appreciating their impact on our country... the issue isn't black and white

1

syncomatic_columbia t1_j1uuja2 wrote

When did I dismiss or accept slavery? Historians for decades have agreed (besides Ulrich Phillips, who was an actual racist) that slavery was intertwined into the US economy, especially post market rev (~1820s-40s) with cotton and textile mills, etc. Slavery wasn't even a thought in the 1700s, basically everyone accepted it like I said... I'm not accepting slavery as a good thing, just that history is multifaceted and rarely "this good this bad"

1

IronSeagull t1_j1v9dw9 wrote

I think there's two reasons for this. 1. We're conditioned to view left to right movement as advancing, as is typical in movies and stuff. Not sure if movies are the cause of that conditioning or an effect. 2. Maps have north on top, east on the right, west on the left, so we default to interpret it as if the viewer is facing north and Washington is moving west to Pennsylvania.

The painter lived for a time in Philadelphia so I doubt he was confused about the geography. I guess the left-right movement conditioning wasn't a thing in the 1850s, or he would have painted them facing the other way. Or maybe he wanted to depict the return trip since they crossed at night, but that'd be a weird thing to paint.

2