It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why people put their hands in their coat in portraits?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Hands in the pockets was done to hide the reptile claws that most leaders have. They just didn't have the ability to shift change their reptile claws into human hands yet.




posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: xbeta
a friend of mine was walking next to me the other day asked why i am walking with my one hand in my coat through the buttons. then i noticed. my hand was in my coat. i didnt do it deliberately or for a reason then we talked and we remembered it was in portraits of people in history. do you have any insight why they do it?

They kept their hands warm so they were ready to draw their swords or other weapons.
I still use that method sitting in my treestand in cold weather. I don't like shooting while wearing gloves.



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Ancient Greek custom.
It was thought of as rude to speak of important matters of State, when you had your hands exposed.



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: xbeta
People used to come up with theories, including comic theories, about why Napoleon in particular stuck his right hand inside his coat. Cartoons of him suddenly producing a rabbit, for example.
Let me quote the great historical authority, "1066 and all that" (Sellars and Yeatman);

Napoleon ought never to be confused with Nelson, in spite of their hats being alike; they can most easily be distinguished from one another by the fact that Nelson always stood with his arm like this, while Napoleon always stood with his arms like that.(ch47)



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

For Napolean I heard it had to do with him having a hernia.

I like hidden hand illuminati myself...



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: pteridine

Nah.

www.phrases.org.uk...


Everyone has their own version.........

mentalfloss.com...

The Tall Tale: In George Washington's days, there were no cameras. One's image was either sculpted or painted. Some paintings of Washington showed him standing behind a desk with one arm behind his back while others showed both legs and both arms. Prices charged by painters were not based on how many people were to be painted, but by how many limbs were to be painted. Arms and legs are limbs, therefore painting them would cost the buyer more. Hence the expression, "Okay, but it'll cost you an arm and a leg.”

The Facts: Usually, the more people depicted, the bigger the painting, thus the heftier the price—but there never was a limb-tally system of pricing for artworks. The expression “to cost an arm and a leg” is a metaphor about precious body parts. The similar line “I’d give my right arm…” dates from the early 1600s. The phrase “an arm and a leg” rattled off the tongue easily before it was used to signify an exorbitant price. After the American Civil War, Congress enacted a special pension for soldiers who had lost both an arm and a leg. The phrase “cost an arm and a leg” begins to crop up in newspaper archives in 1901, referring to accidents and war injuries. In 1949, it shows up in the figurative sense. The Long Beach Independent reported, "Food editor Beulah Karney has … ideas for the homemaker who wants to say 'Merry Christmas' and not have it cost an arm and a leg."



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Some believed back then that portraits and then even pictures captured your soul, so they put their hand over their heart in hope to prevent this.



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine




Everyone has their own version

Your source says what mine does. The expression has nothing to do with the cost of portraiture.


edit on 4/9/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 04:48 PM
link   
I've never been narcissistic enough to have a portrait done.




posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: xbeta
a friend of mine was walking next to me the other day asked why i am walking with my one hand in my coat through the buttons. then i noticed. my hand was in my coat. i didnt do it deliberately or for a reason then we talked and we remembered it was in portraits of people in history. do you have any insight why they do it?

They kept their hands warm so they were ready to draw their swords or other weapons.
I still use that method sitting in my treestand in cold weather. I don't like shooting while wearing gloves.


And the answer is as posted above (at least in my book)



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: xbeta
do you have any insight why they do it?


Cuz they're wimps. Same reason old guys walk around with the hands clasped behind their backs. To the pretense of being gentleman, versus non-subbies who don't put their hands in their pockets or parade around with their hands behind their backs.

Always keep your hands out of your pockets to show self-confidence, and the ever present ability to do combat.



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: xbeta


...remembered it was in portraits of people in history. do you have any insight why they do it?

In pockets, in the waist band, arms folded or on hips. They also wore top hats and carried canes, It was a sign of being relaxed , no worries, well off.

image

image search



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Me neither. My family has millions of photographs, here we are and here we are and there we are.

Seems so phony.

"A photograph is like reading one page from a novel." --(Scorsese, I think)

edit on 9-4-2017 by intrptr because: clarity



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Probably to hide their wedding bands from sexy female admirers.



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: LookingForABetterLife
Hands in the pockets was done to hide the reptile claws that most leaders have. They just didn't have the ability to shift change their reptile claws into human hands yet.

The hidden hand (or claw)



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: xbeta


I heard it was the artists hands are difficult to draw so when modeling they would have the subject hide them. Basically they lied to them and told them it was more sophisticated.



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96
I dont buy that for a second. I bet there's a painting of you and Reagan riding a bald eagle shooting red bears with AR15s



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Maybe they just liked the looks of the poses. Early social fad that was en vogue or something.

My husband unconsciously prefers to have his photo taken with his hands clasped behind his back. I prefer my hands in my pockets, it's more comfortable on my shoulders. Tinfoil away with that one.



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: xbeta
a friend of mine was walking next to me the other day asked why i am walking with my one hand in my coat through the buttons. then i noticed. my hand was in my coat. i didnt do it deliberately or for a reason then we talked and we remembered it was in portraits of people in history. do you have any insight why they do it?
If it's their right hand, it's a Masonic cue. ∆¥∆



posted on Apr, 9 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Never mind.
edit on 2017-04-09T22:12:06-05:002201709America/Chicago4 by c2oden because: (no reason given)







 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join