>>11
Yes, there seems to be some rather comical confusion of identities here. This is actually the first post by the Grand Douche since (4). Though I don't know if I can claim any unique or special grandeur for my own particular douchery these days, as someone else seems to have taken on my former function of pulling your Cracky-worshipping legs and to be fulfilling it with considerable skill and style, in my opinion. (9) and (11) are his, I would assume and (9), at least, is a very well-executed piece of Swiftian irony: the image of St. Francis as a 13th-Century Frasier swanning around trying to impress everyone with how cultured and intelligent he is is a marvellous piece of utter incoherence that I wish I'd thought up myself.

My own remark about the resemblance between the Waterhouse painting and the shot in the Rossellini film, though, was, FYI, quite the opposite of a pretentious "Frasier-ism". It was just a naive expression of the first thing I thought when I saw the original post. It had already been remarked by the poster of (2) how much more striking the daisies and other wild flowers are than any other feature of the painting and a similar effect - I think anyone who watches the video will agree - really is to be noted in the Rossellini scene.

I would contend, then, that the Rossellini remark definitely IS "related" to the Waterhouse painting - an art historian (something I'm not) might be able to trace this foregrounding of the flowers in both images back to some theme or technique in Renaissance painting that both Waterhouse and Rossellini were familiar with - although, of course, that means that it is only CRACKY-related in so distant and derived a way as to amount indeed to a distraction from the theme of your board.

Something I wouldn't want to be guilty of just at present, as it's inarguable that .71 is making an honest effort NOT to become the chaotic (though sometimes enjoyable) mess that Crackyhouse currently is.