Mr. Rafieh’s Tehran Pencil Shop(ana.press)
ana.press
Mr. Rafieh’s Tehran Pencil Shop
https://www.ana.press/photo/548339/دنیای-مداد-رنگی
83 comments
I tend to dislike photographs of myself. I once spent Christmas at a gathering hosted by a photographer. He spent the evening walking around taking photographs of people/the general goings on. I remember seeing the photographs after and looking at myself/others and thinking "The respect that the photographer has for the people in these photographs is immense". And yeah we all seemed to be having a good time, but there's some extra layer of dignity/worth/soul that he managed to endow everything with, and I felt so grateful to be able to see myself captured in that way. Your comment reminded me a bit of that.
>> Years ago, I dismissed photography as a pretentious hobby that would be rendered obsolete as smartphone cameras and digital improvements became more ubiquitous.
Actually, smartphone cameras make photography even much more accessible. I don't want to sound old, but perhaps you remember 3 or 4 decades ago where all people took pictures with film. It's a limited media (usually 36 frames or less on bigger formats). No instant feedback (have to send them to film lab to be developed or do it on your own darkroom). And for some, indeed photography was a relatively expensive hobby.
Now the barrier is much much lower. Smartphone camera techs are getting better. And you don't need high end PC running Lightroom/Photoshop etc for image editing. Simply use smartphone apps. These are good enough for most of us, social media oriented persons.
Sure, if you want better image quality, eventually you'll upgrade to camera with bigger image sensor (M43, APSC etc) like the pros do.
I'd say smartphone cameras render compact digital point & shoot useless, instead.
Actually, smartphone cameras make photography even much more accessible. I don't want to sound old, but perhaps you remember 3 or 4 decades ago where all people took pictures with film. It's a limited media (usually 36 frames or less on bigger formats). No instant feedback (have to send them to film lab to be developed or do it on your own darkroom). And for some, indeed photography was a relatively expensive hobby.
Now the barrier is much much lower. Smartphone camera techs are getting better. And you don't need high end PC running Lightroom/Photoshop etc for image editing. Simply use smartphone apps. These are good enough for most of us, social media oriented persons.
Sure, if you want better image quality, eventually you'll upgrade to camera with bigger image sensor (M43, APSC etc) like the pros do.
I'd say smartphone cameras render compact digital point & shoot useless, instead.
I think the olden days of photography with the limits on the rolls etc, created some great photographers. You didn't have an infinite supply of film at your disposal so every shot had to be thought through.
Action and sports photography is an exception to this since you just click as many photos as you can to capture the right moment.
So I wonder if the explosion of digital cameras and smartphones have helped in creating better photographers. One argument could be that now there are lot more people who are taking up photography and some of them eventually will figure out the intricacies of the craft and become better photographers. Kind of like the 80-20 rule. On the flip side there is also a lot of noise (people just clicking photos), which is fine I think.
Action and sports photography is an exception to this since you just click as many photos as you can to capture the right moment.
So I wonder if the explosion of digital cameras and smartphones have helped in creating better photographers. One argument could be that now there are lot more people who are taking up photography and some of them eventually will figure out the intricacies of the craft and become better photographers. Kind of like the 80-20 rule. On the flip side there is also a lot of noise (people just clicking photos), which is fine I think.
It is definitely easier and quicker to skill up as a budding photographer now as feedback is instantaneous, and tutorials/tips are widespread. As a budding photographer back at the beginning of the 1990s, I sank a fortune into Fuji slide film, which had a processing-paid envelope in the box and the fastest turnaround of anything by post. Mail on Monday, arrives there Tuesday and is processed and returned, back to you Wednesday. 36 pictures. I was one of maybe a dozen people on campus with an SLR camera.
When a photographer compliments another photographer, they rarely say "you have a good camera."
They say "you have a good eye."
They say "you have a good eye."
Any idea what his town of origin might be? The leather workers in the southern highlands of Ecuador (talabarteros, often specializing in saddles) are exceptional.
Years ago, I dismissed photography as a pretentious hobby that would be rendered obsolete as smartphone cameras and digital improvements became more ubiquitous
You just listed a couple tools for photography though. If anything they will lower the barrier of entry for photography and more people will participate (pretty much what happened)
You just listed a couple tools for photography though. If anything they will lower the barrier of entry for photography and more people will participate (pretty much what happened)
Here's a rough translation for anyone interested in the text in the article:
The world of Colored pencils
Going through the narrow alleys of the stationary bazaar, there's a name that's familiar to all and an address that's hacked on all the tradespeople's minds. If you're looking for colored pencils, everyone'll point you to Mr. Rafieh's shop. "It's been thirty years that I get my energy from setting up kids with their colored pencil box. At the moment I have one of the biggest collections of colored pencils.", he says. Beginner and professional painters alike come to him for recommendations on colored pencils. The rare old models from the west or the ones produced in the country, he has them all. Mr. Rafieh's colorful stall has been drawing the attention of passerby for many years now.
The world of Colored pencils
Going through the narrow alleys of the stationary bazaar, there's a name that's familiar to all and an address that's hacked on all the tradespeople's minds. If you're looking for colored pencils, everyone'll point you to Mr. Rafieh's shop. "It's been thirty years that I get my energy from setting up kids with their colored pencil box. At the moment I have one of the biggest collections of colored pencils.", he says. Beginner and professional painters alike come to him for recommendations on colored pencils. The rare old models from the west or the ones produced in the country, he has them all. Mr. Rafieh's colorful stall has been drawing the attention of passerby for many years now.
Thank you very much for that.
There was a BBC documentary called The Secret History of Writing, where a Turkish calligrapher talks about how they save all their pencil shavings and after the person dies the pencil and paper scraps of their lifetime are used to heat the water that will clean their body as part of the burial process.
https://youtu.be/TyfIS9b77A8?t=7854
https://youtu.be/TyfIS9b77A8?t=7854
It fills me with a deep sorrow knowing that I will never be able to visit Iran as an American. I don't know if it's just the "forbidden fruit" aspect of it or not, but it's my number one bucket list destination.
I am an Iranian-American (dual citizen) and I suggest you to NOT visit Iran. You may be subjected to arbitrary arrests.
P.S. I haven't visited Iran since high school over 12 years ago and I miss my friends and family there so much.
P.S. I haven't visited Iran since high school over 12 years ago and I miss my friends and family there so much.
Lots of people from USA are visiting Iran. We travel to Shiraz regularly and even during the previous presidency we have witnessed planes full of Americans travelling there. It was quite hopeful for all as it demonstrated USA is not a narrow minded bunch… quite the opposite!
>planes full of Americans travelling there
Unlike the rest of the world, Americans can only visit with organized tours.[0]
[0]Unless you've got some Persian relatives you're visiting.
Unlike the rest of the world, Americans can only visit with organized tours.[0]
[0]Unless you've got some Persian relatives you're visiting.
Is that an Iranian sanction on the USA, or US law (hoping to make it easier to spot unwanted behaviour or something)?
It's Iran's requirement.[0]
[0]https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-tra...
[0]https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-tra...
I want to visit too and I know why - the history and culture.
Unfortunately like many middle-east countries the government is not representative of the people.
Unfortunately like many middle-east countries the government is not representative of the people.
don't say never. Until forty years ago you could have visited the country without problem. Maybe in a few years you will be able to, again. International politics is cruel, unpredictable and complex, but also fast paced. You can also acquire a different nationality and travel under your new passport.
I'm not sure what your situation is but I know Americans that have gone through an intermediate country
>I'm not sure what your situation is but I know Americans that have gone through an intermediate country
It's possible, sure. But the risk of arbitrary detention would make it impossible to enjoy. The state department currently lists Iran as "Level 4: Do not travel", and suggests you have a will in order if you do [0]. There was a brief moment towards the end of the Obama era where it seemed things may have been thawing, but with the Soleimani assassination I don't have much hope for the future in that regard.
[0] https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...
It's possible, sure. But the risk of arbitrary detention would make it impossible to enjoy. The state department currently lists Iran as "Level 4: Do not travel", and suggests you have a will in order if you do [0]. There was a brief moment towards the end of the Obama era where it seemed things may have been thawing, but with the Soleimani assassination I don't have much hope for the future in that regard.
[0] https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...
You should have a will even if you stay home. And a living will in case you are vegetating and the plug needs to be pulled.
Most people in Iran know there are a bunch of assholes running things there just like there are here. Daily life for most people there consists mostly of mundane things like colored pencils.
Travel requires treating irrational fears as irrational. If you want to go, you can find a way. Your life will be different afterwards because that's what any travel does.
The ways in which people change from travel is why Americans have been banned from Cuba for sixty years and Iran for forty.
Most people in Iran know there are a bunch of assholes running things there just like there are here. Daily life for most people there consists mostly of mundane things like colored pencils.
Travel requires treating irrational fears as irrational. If you want to go, you can find a way. Your life will be different afterwards because that's what any travel does.
The ways in which people change from travel is why Americans have been banned from Cuba for sixty years and Iran for forty.
iran - and many other countries in the world - could take you happily as a hostage if your government is considered an enemy.
Statistically speaking insanely improbable. ~5m people and thousands of Americans visit Iran every year. Unless you're a anti-govt journalist or intelligence related you have nothing to worry about.
N.B. the argument that Iran will falsely label you a 'spy' feels weak to me given the order of magnitude of such detentions in recent history is in the tens. It would be equally improbably that most of these detentions were false positives as plenty of foreign intelligence operations happen in any country. Especially given the amount of foreign-intelligence related sabotage in recent Iranian history.
N.B. the argument that Iran will falsely label you a 'spy' feels weak to me given the order of magnitude of such detentions in recent history is in the tens. It would be equally improbably that most of these detentions were false positives as plenty of foreign intelligence operations happen in any country. Especially given the amount of foreign-intelligence related sabotage in recent Iranian history.
There's this person: https://behdadesfahbod.medium.com/if-you-read-one-thing-from...
Extremely respected engineer both in Iran and America, ran tech initiatives for youths in Iran, a key figure in international text rendering. No political activity, but he got arrested and coerced anyway because the Iranian government wanted to force him to become a spy.
He managed to escape, but it ruined his life and career.
Extremely respected engineer both in Iran and America, ran tech initiatives for youths in Iran, a key figure in international text rendering. No political activity, but he got arrested and coerced anyway because the Iranian government wanted to force him to become a spy.
He managed to escape, but it ruined his life and career.
of those visitors there will hardly be many at which your country is basically at war which is the case for americans. i can freely travel to iran but i wouldn't recommend it to an american.
I think your fear is misguided.
You may never see Iran...but not because you are an American. Instead, it is because Iran is a ticking time bomb.
Once the country opens back up, and it will open back up - you have to question whether there will be anything left to see.
Civil war is a nasty thing. See: Syria.
I recommend you visit now before its too late.
You may never see Iran...but not because you are an American. Instead, it is because Iran is a ticking time bomb.
Once the country opens back up, and it will open back up - you have to question whether there will be anything left to see.
Civil war is a nasty thing. See: Syria.
I recommend you visit now before its too late.
> Iran is a ticking time bomb
I don't think so. Sure, its a dictatorship and flawed in many ways, but that doesn't mean the people are not happy.
Society will bear some amount of constant pressure, to a certain degree.
If that pressure progresses into a puncture, society will rupture.
So far, Iran doesn't seem to be in that situation.
Iran has been in its current state since 1979. That is 40 whole years. And we have not seen any major shifts in their society.
It looks stronger than ever, now that Iraq and Afghanistan (thanks to the trigger happy policy of America) are in the dumps, Iran is a strong and critical player.
I don't think so. Sure, its a dictatorship and flawed in many ways, but that doesn't mean the people are not happy.
Society will bear some amount of constant pressure, to a certain degree.
If that pressure progresses into a puncture, society will rupture.
So far, Iran doesn't seem to be in that situation.
Iran has been in its current state since 1979. That is 40 whole years. And we have not seen any major shifts in their society.
It looks stronger than ever, now that Iraq and Afghanistan (thanks to the trigger happy policy of America) are in the dumps, Iran is a strong and critical player.
Why is it certain that opening up Iran would lead to Civil war?
When I read your first paragraph I assumed you were referring to these mom and pop kinda shops going out of business once the economy develops, replacing them with cookie cutter malls or online retail.
When I read your first paragraph I assumed you were referring to these mom and pop kinda shops going out of business once the economy develops, replacing them with cookie cutter malls or online retail.
I believe he's saying the opposite -- it will open back up after the civil war.
sorry i may not have expressed my thoughts correctly.
Repression tends to lead to explosive results in the shape of civil war. See arab spring, syria, etc.
I don't think it has much to business (insofar tourism is concerned), but more about tourist sites being potentially destroyed.
Repression tends to lead to explosive results in the shape of civil war. See arab spring, syria, etc.
I don't think it has much to business (insofar tourism is concerned), but more about tourist sites being potentially destroyed.
I feel the same way about Cuba. My Uncle worked there as a banker and almost my entire family visited him there at one time or another.
I asked him once when it opened up again why he hadn't gone back. He said the trips are forced tours and that he wouldn't be free to get a car and revisit the haunts of his youth.
I made up my mind that I wouldn't visit Cuba until the communists were gone. I was pretty confident after Castro the government would fall. Now I am not so sure.
I asked him once when it opened up again why he hadn't gone back. He said the trips are forced tours and that he wouldn't be free to get a car and revisit the haunts of his youth.
I made up my mind that I wouldn't visit Cuba until the communists were gone. I was pretty confident after Castro the government would fall. Now I am not so sure.
Direct flights to Cuba have been available since 2016. You can go whenever you want minus any pending revolution.
Half of Miami seems to be pretty sure atm.
I wouldn't be suprised if the military rebelled within a few days.
So much for freedom, right? After all, the US has a very loud voice on all things freedom related but when it comes to the rights of its own citizens to do as they please the degree of freedom appears to be lower than that of many states that have lesser profile in the freedom department. Countries should not limit their citizens freedoms on the basis of politics, that's no different than the various dictatorships that want to keep their people in (and the foreigners out), it's just a matter of degree.
Whether it is safe - or wise - to do so is another matter.
Whether it is safe - or wise - to do so is another matter.
US citizens are allowed to go to Iran. The state department has issued a travel advisory, but it was issued on the basis of kidnappings and arbitrary arrests of U.S. citizens.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...
I'd be his regular customer if I lived there. The curation he provides is very valuable; I found this out over the past few years as we went through different brands of colored pencils. Even brands I remember from growing up as my favorite ones turn out to be so bad compared to the best I managed to find. The main two properties I found useful to look at is the color saturation and resistance to cracking of the lead, especially under sharpening.
Some noname sets found randomly in clearance bins are so bad some of the colors could not be sharpened even once. Maybe I need a different kind of sharpener.
Some noname sets found randomly in clearance bins are so bad some of the colors could not be sharpened even once. Maybe I need a different kind of sharpener.
Wow Tehran is full of beautiful things that even someone from Iran like me doesn't know
I've spent half a day looking through pictures of Iran from before the revolution, it was - and in many ways probably still is - an absolutely amazing country. Sooner or later the mullahs will be given their walking papers and hopefully the country can then recover some of its former splendor.
Europeans have been anti-Persian since before Socrates was a hoplite.
It would be better if fifteen hundred years of Islamophobia was disinfected from Europe. It's a double standard where nobody sees a problem with England even though there's a state religion and the religious head and government head are the same person...and unlike Iran, those roles are hereditary.
Iran today looks like what throwing off the yoke of foreign influence looks like. So far it has only been going on half as long as the Guerra de los Ochenta Años took to free the Netherlands from Spanish Influence.
Never mind the bloody legacy of Calvinism though. The traditional head of the European church launched the crusades and backed the long slog in the Iberian Peninsula.
So long as the first reaction is to frame Iran in religious terms, the Mullahs are logically correct in their claims about the enemy without.
It would be better if fifteen hundred years of Islamophobia was disinfected from Europe. It's a double standard where nobody sees a problem with England even though there's a state religion and the religious head and government head are the same person...and unlike Iran, those roles are hereditary.
Iran today looks like what throwing off the yoke of foreign influence looks like. So far it has only been going on half as long as the Guerra de los Ochenta Años took to free the Netherlands from Spanish Influence.
Never mind the bloody legacy of Calvinism though. The traditional head of the European church launched the crusades and backed the long slog in the Iberian Peninsula.
So long as the first reaction is to frame Iran in religious terms, the Mullahs are logically correct in their claims about the enemy without.
I agree that Islamophobia contributes to unhelpfully negative attitudes towards Iran.
> It's a double standard where nobody sees a problem with England even though there's a state religion and the religious head and government head are the same person...and unlike Iran, those roles are hereditary.
I don’t think that anyone familiar with both countries would consider that the rôle of the two is remotely comparable. The Queen’s influence, except when acting on the advice of the PM (i.e., doing precisely what the PM says), on the vast majority of policymaking is negligible. The Supreme Leader’s influence is much broader. The Supreme Leader chooses all sorts of important ministers (e.g., the interior and defence ministers). The IRGC directly reports to Khamanei and he does not direct it on the advice of the President.
As for the established church, it has barely any effect: at most, a few votes in the Lords (which under the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 can be overriden by the Commons.) Government policy and the wishes of the C of E are pretty clearly in tension, which is why e.g. Thatcher spent rather a lot of time criticising bishops for effectively calling her heartless. Meanwhile in Iran, all sorts of policies are dictated by the religious establishment, e.g., Qisas.
> Iran today looks like what throwing off the yoke of foreign influence looks like.
There are many ways to ‘throw off the yoke of foreign influence’ (and hopefully replace it with a healthy attitude towards foreign ideas.) I don’t think it’s incorrect to suggest that there are pretty substantial deficiencies in the seem not particularly to like the present path taken by the régime. See e.g. Ahmadinejad (presumably irked by being sidelined) on MEMRI (I know, I know),¹ or the election of Khatami and Rouhani (whose ambitions have often been thwarted by those you seem to be defending here.)
> Never mind the bloody legacy of Calvinism though. The traditional head of the European church launched the crusades and backed the long slog in the Iberian Peninsula.
This seems to be logically fallacious whataboutism—where do you get the idea that OP wants a return to Roman Catholic theocracy?
> So long as the first reaction is to frame Iran in religious terms, the Mullahs are logically correct in their claims about the enemy without.
Simply criticising the religious establishment as done above is common even amongst Iranians, so this seems to miss the point. Now, it may be that actually this is cover for some raving about Muslims generally or Iran qua an Islamic Republic as opposed to one say even less democratic than e.g. Pakistan or Bangladesh. But this comment seems to be a sort of reflexive defence against a certain sort of Islamophobic criticism which wasn’t actually made.
1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUW_XwvHQNw, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bOfDBoQ7yA
> It's a double standard where nobody sees a problem with England even though there's a state religion and the religious head and government head are the same person...and unlike Iran, those roles are hereditary.
I don’t think that anyone familiar with both countries would consider that the rôle of the two is remotely comparable. The Queen’s influence, except when acting on the advice of the PM (i.e., doing precisely what the PM says), on the vast majority of policymaking is negligible. The Supreme Leader’s influence is much broader. The Supreme Leader chooses all sorts of important ministers (e.g., the interior and defence ministers). The IRGC directly reports to Khamanei and he does not direct it on the advice of the President.
As for the established church, it has barely any effect: at most, a few votes in the Lords (which under the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 can be overriden by the Commons.) Government policy and the wishes of the C of E are pretty clearly in tension, which is why e.g. Thatcher spent rather a lot of time criticising bishops for effectively calling her heartless. Meanwhile in Iran, all sorts of policies are dictated by the religious establishment, e.g., Qisas.
> Iran today looks like what throwing off the yoke of foreign influence looks like.
There are many ways to ‘throw off the yoke of foreign influence’ (and hopefully replace it with a healthy attitude towards foreign ideas.) I don’t think it’s incorrect to suggest that there are pretty substantial deficiencies in the seem not particularly to like the present path taken by the régime. See e.g. Ahmadinejad (presumably irked by being sidelined) on MEMRI (I know, I know),¹ or the election of Khatami and Rouhani (whose ambitions have often been thwarted by those you seem to be defending here.)
> Never mind the bloody legacy of Calvinism though. The traditional head of the European church launched the crusades and backed the long slog in the Iberian Peninsula.
This seems to be logically fallacious whataboutism—where do you get the idea that OP wants a return to Roman Catholic theocracy?
> So long as the first reaction is to frame Iran in religious terms, the Mullahs are logically correct in their claims about the enemy without.
Simply criticising the religious establishment as done above is common even amongst Iranians, so this seems to miss the point. Now, it may be that actually this is cover for some raving about Muslims generally or Iran qua an Islamic Republic as opposed to one say even less democratic than e.g. Pakistan or Bangladesh. But this comment seems to be a sort of reflexive defence against a certain sort of Islamophobic criticism which wasn’t actually made.
1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUW_XwvHQNw, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bOfDBoQ7yA
The English Parliament is allowed to pass legislation to which the head of state consents.
Among such legislation is the English church’s military arm engaging in the ongoing Irish religious war. A conflict that goes back to the time Henry VIII made his own church to sanction his divorce…so he could marry the first woman he is known to have killed.
More recently the English head of state created a new legal structure to harden the already armed religious border on Ireland.
Among such legislation is the English church’s military arm engaging in the ongoing Irish religious war. A conflict that goes back to the time Henry VIII made his own church to sanction his divorce…so he could marry the first woman he is known to have killed.
More recently the English head of state created a new legal structure to harden the already armed religious border on Ireland.
> The English parliament
doesn’t exist; presumably you mean either the UK parliament or the Legislative Grand Committee for England.
> is allowed to pass legislation to which the head of state consents
Case 1: you mean the UK parliament.
In this case, royal assent is a mere formality. The last refusal of royal assent was in 1708, and on the advice of the PM. Constitutional practice has changed since that time. Refusal of assent is an impossibility—in particular if it a purported refusal were on the advice of the PM; see Miller:
> This court is not, therefore, precluded by article 9 or by any wider Parliamentary privilege from considering the validity of the prorogation itself. The logical approach to that question is to start at the beginning, with the advice that led to it. That advice was unlawful. It was outside the powers of the Prime Minister to give it. This means that it was null and of no effect: see, if authority were needed, R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, para 119. It led to the Order in Council which, being founded on unlawful advice, was likewise unlawful, null and of no effect and should be quashed. This led to the actual prorogation, which was as if the Commissioners had walked into Parliament with a blank piece of paper. It too was unlawful, null and of no effect. —R (Miller) v PM [2019] UKSC 41 at para 69
Now the Guardian has recently published certain articles on Queen’s consent. I found its misuse regrettable. However, the scope of Queen’s consent is essentially the regulation of a very small fiefdom—probably less in value than e.g. a supermarket chain. This pales in comparison to e.g. control of defence and foreign policy, which the Supreme Leader and religious establishment have. Royal assent, therefore, provides no grounds for drawing an equivalence between Iran and the UK.
Case 2: you mean the Legislative Grand Committee for England.
The Legislative Grand Committees had no power to pass legislation to which a majority of the Commons was opposed.
> Among such legislation is the English church’s military arm engaging in the ongoing Irish religious war. A conflict that goes back to the time Henry VIII made his own church to sanction his divorce…so he could marry the first woman he is known to have killed.
There is no ‘ongoing Irish religious war’; it is an insult to the victims of the Troubles, the siege of Drogheda, etc. to suggest that present conflicts are remotely similar.
It is pretty hard to work out in these circumlocutions what you are actually referring to here, but I hazard that you are referring to the Irish border. You seem to ignore that, as I point out, HM Government does not exercise its powers on the advice of the Church of England, and indeed often the C of E is rather opposed to government policy (see e.g. _The Guardian_, 18 October 2020: ‘The Anglican church has publicly challenged the government’s willingness to break international law over Brexit, with five archbishops from Great Britain and Ireland joining together to condemn what could be a “disastrous precedent”.’)
> More recently the English head of state created a new legal structure to harden the already armed religious border on Ireland.
Nobody acts _qua_ the ‘English head of state’ because there is no such thing.
A fundamental mistake here is to see the acts of a reactionary but democratically elected government in the UK as _sui generis_ because monarchy is symbolically reactionary. When HM Government do stupid things, they do so in the same way any other Western government does stupid things. That laws begin with a recitation that they are enacted by ‘the Queen's most Excellent Majesty’ is a distraction.
doesn’t exist; presumably you mean either the UK parliament or the Legislative Grand Committee for England.
> is allowed to pass legislation to which the head of state consents
Case 1: you mean the UK parliament.
In this case, royal assent is a mere formality. The last refusal of royal assent was in 1708, and on the advice of the PM. Constitutional practice has changed since that time. Refusal of assent is an impossibility—in particular if it a purported refusal were on the advice of the PM; see Miller:
> This court is not, therefore, precluded by article 9 or by any wider Parliamentary privilege from considering the validity of the prorogation itself. The logical approach to that question is to start at the beginning, with the advice that led to it. That advice was unlawful. It was outside the powers of the Prime Minister to give it. This means that it was null and of no effect: see, if authority were needed, R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, para 119. It led to the Order in Council which, being founded on unlawful advice, was likewise unlawful, null and of no effect and should be quashed. This led to the actual prorogation, which was as if the Commissioners had walked into Parliament with a blank piece of paper. It too was unlawful, null and of no effect. —R (Miller) v PM [2019] UKSC 41 at para 69
Now the Guardian has recently published certain articles on Queen’s consent. I found its misuse regrettable. However, the scope of Queen’s consent is essentially the regulation of a very small fiefdom—probably less in value than e.g. a supermarket chain. This pales in comparison to e.g. control of defence and foreign policy, which the Supreme Leader and religious establishment have. Royal assent, therefore, provides no grounds for drawing an equivalence between Iran and the UK.
Case 2: you mean the Legislative Grand Committee for England.
The Legislative Grand Committees had no power to pass legislation to which a majority of the Commons was opposed.
> Among such legislation is the English church’s military arm engaging in the ongoing Irish religious war. A conflict that goes back to the time Henry VIII made his own church to sanction his divorce…so he could marry the first woman he is known to have killed.
There is no ‘ongoing Irish religious war’; it is an insult to the victims of the Troubles, the siege of Drogheda, etc. to suggest that present conflicts are remotely similar.
It is pretty hard to work out in these circumlocutions what you are actually referring to here, but I hazard that you are referring to the Irish border. You seem to ignore that, as I point out, HM Government does not exercise its powers on the advice of the Church of England, and indeed often the C of E is rather opposed to government policy (see e.g. _The Guardian_, 18 October 2020: ‘The Anglican church has publicly challenged the government’s willingness to break international law over Brexit, with five archbishops from Great Britain and Ireland joining together to condemn what could be a “disastrous precedent”.’)
> More recently the English head of state created a new legal structure to harden the already armed religious border on Ireland.
Nobody acts _qua_ the ‘English head of state’ because there is no such thing.
A fundamental mistake here is to see the acts of a reactionary but democratically elected government in the UK as _sui generis_ because monarchy is symbolically reactionary. When HM Government do stupid things, they do so in the same way any other Western government does stupid things. That laws begin with a recitation that they are enacted by ‘the Queen's most Excellent Majesty’ is a distraction.
My attitude towards Islam is roughly equivalent to my attitude towards any religion. And it starts with a strict separation of religion and the state, which is something Iran currently doesn't have (and which the UK also doesn't have, and in both cases my position is pretty consistent).
Yeah, I imagine it:
- It would be bombed and looted by foreign army ("In the name of democracy!")
- Hundreds of thousands of people will die from bombs, same amount from hunger and civil unrest caused by destruction of the infrastructure and government system (police, hospitals, etc.)
- Foreign companies will take control of Iran's oil (the main reason why Iran is considered "hostile country" now is that it controls its natural resources), so that profits from selling the oil flow to other countries (exactly the same happened recently in Libya and Syria)
It would become unsafe to visit, and most cities would be in ruins. Crime rates would go through the roof.
- It would be bombed and looted by foreign army ("In the name of democracy!")
- Hundreds of thousands of people will die from bombs, same amount from hunger and civil unrest caused by destruction of the infrastructure and government system (police, hospitals, etc.)
- Foreign companies will take control of Iran's oil (the main reason why Iran is considered "hostile country" now is that it controls its natural resources), so that profits from selling the oil flow to other countries (exactly the same happened recently in Libya and Syria)
It would become unsafe to visit, and most cities would be in ruins. Crime rates would go through the roof.
Khruangbin has a music video featuring female pop artists from before the revolution. They get systematically erased toward the end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hlGqj3ImQI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hlGqj3ImQI
Wonderful gallery! Interesting sharpening technique in image 7 with a blunt writing tip. Typically you'd seen a more angled cone [0] and a sharper end, but I guess this means no color is wasted when doing the initial sharpening?
Anyone note a list of his brands? I think I see some Faber-Castell but can't ID anything else.
[0] https://unsharpen.com/the-parts-of-wooden-pencil/
Anyone note a list of his brands? I think I see some Faber-Castell but can't ID anything else.
[0] https://unsharpen.com/the-parts-of-wooden-pencil/
To anybody with a cynical view of Iran and its people I highly recommend watching this fairly recent documentary about a British guy riding a motorcycle through the country. The people seem like some of the most friendly in the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2LEgowbzSc
> To anybody with a cynical, narrow-minded view of Iran and its people I highly recommend ...
Do you expect any reader of this comment to say to themselves "Ah, that's me!"?
Do you expect any reader of this comment to say to themselves "Ah, that's me!"?
I am pretty aware that my viewpoints get shrouded and can benefit from a change of perspective. So yes, I admit that I am narrow-minded.
It's why I like posts like this and loved National Geographic growing up; the feeling of realizing how narrow-minded and judgemental I can be getting dissolved by fascinating exposes and beautiful art and photography.
It's why I like posts like this and loved National Geographic growing up; the feeling of realizing how narrow-minded and judgemental I can be getting dissolved by fascinating exposes and beautiful art and photography.
I did not. But I see what you're saying and I edited it to make it more chill.
>To anybody with a cynical, narrow-minded view
ABSOLUTELY
>of Iran
...maybe not
ABSOLUTELY
>of Iran
...maybe not
The humble pencil is truly an amazing invention. The Gutenberg press of writing instruments.
He was interviewed for a TV segment in 2018, seems like a cool guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJHIByLnGVo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJHIByLnGVo
I love this.
I'm wondering how well he knows his inventory. Like, can you ask for one particular pencil that's stuck in the middle of one of those shelves, and he goes and pulls it right out?
I'm wondering how well he knows his inventory. Like, can you ask for one particular pencil that's stuck in the middle of one of those shelves, and he goes and pulls it right out?
My guess would be that the pencils of the same property are on each shelf, and the older stuff are buried under newer ones.
For example, one of the labels says "oily pencils".
So perhaps when you go to him and ask for a purple pencil he pulls out a number of purple ones from the bunch that's relevant to you. Then he explains which one is better for you.
For example, one of the labels says "oily pencils".
So perhaps when you go to him and ask for a purple pencil he pulls out a number of purple ones from the bunch that's relevant to you. Then he explains which one is better for you.
Kind of like Ollivader from Harry Potter haha.
Came for this.
“Curious how these things happen. The [pencil] chooses the [writer], remember…”
“Curious how these things happen. The [pencil] chooses the [writer], remember…”
[deleted]
It's a colorful stall, that's for sure.
Does he make the pencils there?
I can't read the writing in the photos but it looks like there are no prices (I don't see any numbers). Can someone who is able to read this chime in?
Does he make the pencils there?
I can't read the writing in the photos but it looks like there are no prices (I don't see any numbers). Can someone who is able to read this chime in?
https://media.ana.press/old/1399/09/24/637435502248341625_lg...
[R to L]: White Pencil. Tailor's White Pencil. White Oil Pencil.
One the side it says "single colored pencils 250 Tomans". The front matter appears to be a verse from Qur'an and below it in Farsi he declares he has 'entrusted all matters to God, the same God that is the protector of its creation'.
[R to L]: White Pencil. Tailor's White Pencil. White Oil Pencil.
One the side it says "single colored pencils 250 Tomans". The front matter appears to be a verse from Qur'an and below it in Farsi he declares he has 'entrusted all matters to God, the same God that is the protector of its creation'.
God (of your choice), I wish I was multi-lingual.
خواستن توانستن است
[[R to L]: Khaastan (To desire/wish) Tavaanestan (to have ability) Ast (is)]
That's a popular Iranian saying. It means "To desire/To will is to achieve." (Where there is a will, there is a way.)
[[R to L]: Khaastan (To desire/wish) Tavaanestan (to have ability) Ast (is)]
That's a popular Iranian saying. It means "To desire/To will is to achieve." (Where there is a will, there is a way.)
Also: Zabaan daani, jahaan daari.
(If you know languages, you posses the world.)
(If you know languages, you posses the world.)
There is a 0 missing in the picture. In another photo[1] it says "2500 Toman" which is about $0.10 USD
[1] https://media.ana.press/old/1399/09/24/637435501254726240_lg...
[1] https://media.ana.press/old/1399/09/24/637435501254726240_lg...
Was wondering about the exchange rate these days. Good catch.
I thought x1000 is usually understood when tomans are quoted
I don’t think he made the pencils, but he has a huge collection apparently from the basic ones to some ancient ones.
I searched a bit online and I couldn’t find any online shop or price samples for the store.
This is their instagram page, but not sure if it adds any more information:
https://instagram.com/medad_rafi
I searched a bit online and I couldn’t find any online shop or price samples for the store.
This is their instagram page, but not sure if it adds any more information:
https://instagram.com/medad_rafi
>Does he make the pencils there?
The pencils in this photo[1] say 'Germany', so my guess is no.
[1] https://www.ana.press/photo/548339/%D8%AF%D9%86%DB%8C%D8%A7%...
The pencils in this photo[1] say 'Germany', so my guess is no.
[1] https://www.ana.press/photo/548339/%D8%AF%D9%86%DB%8C%D8%A7%...
I put a translation in another comment. I don't think he makes them, or at least there's nothing that suggests that in the text. He's more of a collector.
I fear that Mr. Rafieh's webstore is either going to feel the HN hug...or his web hosting bill may be quite high for the month.
A mightily photogenic place, so much colour!
I saw the pencil shop collection. Its really amazing
Just wonderful.
I only bring this up because I had a similar experience with these photos that I had locally. My Hudson Valley town is a delicate balance of many cultures (primarily white, black, and Central American) and our downtown reflects that blend. Most folks would be quick to dismiss one small storefront with a messy front window of leather goods, sculptures, and various Latin American flags, but inside is an expert leather craftsman from Ecuador who makes most of his products by hand.
I never would have bothered entering the store until a local photographer (once recognized as the "town's photo laureate") featured the store in a few social media posts. Some combination of sharing the craftsman's story and recognizing the beauty throughout the store struck the interest of the rest of the town. Suddenly the eccentric storefront became a destination for everyone (kind of like this colored pencil man's stall)