HOME | DD
Algalad —
Human needs
Published: 2014-08-10 00:24:47 +0000 UTC; Views: 17837; Favourites: 901; Downloads: 149
Redirect to original
Description
personal work!this is my third DD , thanks a lot (Ginryuzaki , brietolga and diphylla )
and thanks guys for your all nice comments !
Related content
Comments: 147
Yes....
Exquisite art of man, woman and child. Splendid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The way I see it is the baby and the woman, be she mother or daughter, are holding up the man who is looking into the light. That's how their hands look to me; they're supporting him. He needs them. This is a picture that shows that the main character, the man, needs his wife and child to keep him strong and on his feet. That's how I see it. He needs them, and is dependent on them. They're keeping him up, not hiding behind him. To me, the man looks the most vulnerable. I think that places a lot of importance on his family's role in his life - he needs them. The light is on him perhaps to show he's finding hope, because he is vulnerable right now - and his family is trying to help him. I don't know about others but I think that in general those who help others are stronger than those who need helping. So I don't see it as sexist at all. I think it's beautiful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I do find this picture to be sexist, but I think it's because of the artist's perspective and lack of forethought more than anything. You don't need a fancy analysis to see it, its right there.
Just the body type and lack of reciprocation make the man a symbol of power over the woman. And according to the title, women apparently need men while men need something greater, perhaps the love of a god or something else divine. Even if the artist didn't intend for it to have such a blunt message its hard to get around that idea when it's literally in your face
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Great work!! by the different shades of skin, the perfect anatomy of each character and their positions (I love the child), by a subtle nudity, by lighting that you've given in the precise places making the work more striking... and above all, by what this work represents, each will have their own interpretation, but for me is something beautiful, everyone need someone. Congratulation on the DD. A hug!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This work is amazing! The colouring and use of shading is very eye catching. Love the proportioning of the figures and their expressions.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
So when I first saw this I made the mistake of scrolling through the comments before I really decided to look at it in depth.... wow, I see people have a lot of interpretations for it. But now my own initial reaction hasn't ---- didn't get a chance to manifest itself. Read too many ideas to swirl around in my head first. Now I don't really know what to think.
I just know that I can sense some kind of truth in it.
Maybe if I can distill my roiling feelings into words, I can come back and say something better.
Thank you for creating this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
To people who think it's sexist, just think of it as a graduation in skin roughness .
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh and sorry for the essay, I do that sometimes, going on and on, but I really enjoyed the piece. By the way, congrats on the DD, you can probably tell by my response that I think you deserved it XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Even though my first impression was of suffering, from the man's anguished face, looking into the depth of the picture i can feel a since of hope , as there is no hope without something to hope for. It is apparent that the man seems to be the dominant "object" of the piece, but that doesn't make him the main focus of the artist's message. Referring back to the man's facial expression, it is clear to see that there is something extreme that is beyond himself, yet his positioning or role in their family system shows responsibility and protection, observed by his figure carrying both the harshest highlights and the darkest shadows (and the obvious strength as if he was a human wall). Now in the women's and child's expression seems comfortable and peaceful (at least in comparison to the man's expression) from receiving his protection. They both still receive some light, but it is much more gentle and as a form of gratitude in return, they stand behind the man and simply support him in his time of distress. The use of color reveals that the women and child preside in warmth by the reddish-pink (the baby receiving the most warmth and protection) while the man has a cold blue seen on his side of the cloth (and a little bit in his shoulder). Now what I appreciate in the piece is the connectivity and equal "caringness" (not a word, but it'll have to do) of their family union, observed by their arm positions. The man, instead of shielding himself from the powerful light looks straight towards it while positioning his arm towards the others; The woman embraces the the man and even looks like she's merging into him (though her two hands could easily touch both the man and her child); And the child lies gently as if asleep onto her. Now the only reason I may not consider the neglect of the baby (since it resides at the bottom of the "chain" w/o any attention) is because it is also nested on the "warmest side" (in comparison to the cold blue side) and opposite to the main threat of the picture, the strong light, shielded by both parents. P.S. Light does usually signify God or enlightenment, but knowledge can be good or bad and there can definitely be harsh divine punishment P.P.S It could also be death's light, but by now there can be any number of interpretations of anything in the piece
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
So first off I would like to say you're doing something right because there is a lot of commentary on how this piece could be interpreted.
That said, I have to agree with some of the people on how this COULD be interpreted as a "sexist" piece. Now, before I go on, I just want to say that I don't think it was intended as such, and I can also see how this could be a piece dedicated the support and well being directed at one man (ie the main figure). (But it's the same visual indicators that allow for both interpretations to exist, and for my part, my immediate reaction was to see how this was a selfish portrayal of men. I say men, because to me, that man encompass all man.)
For one thing, the man is the largest figure, allowing him to take up the most space on the canvas and allowing us, the viewers, to see that he is the important figure in this. He is looking up into the light that falls only on him. This piece is about him. All of this is fine in general. However, combined with the fact that there is no acknowledgement of the the two figures behind him, makes this a little uncomfortable for me to look at. Even the female figure seems unaware of the child sleeping child grasping for her, all of her attention and affectionate touch is focused on him. She seems content to be thrown into a supporting role. She doesn't even seem to mind that he doesn't have his hand on her hand or arm or that he doesn't seem to be leaning back into her loving touch. All of his focus is centered on the light above, which is centered totally on him.
And that's the gist of why for me, at least, it seems a bit of a beautifully rendered, self-centered, unthinking piece of art.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I can kind of see where you're coming from, though I can't say I agree with it. There's a comment by orgianimekid up above that I really agree with and think fits a bit better, and might make you see the picture in a different light(no pun intended). Personally I don't think its about making him the center of the piece, but kind of showing some one thrown into a situation where a spotlight is cast upon them, and it shows the life behind that spotlight. The loving family. Also I have some trouble seeing her as a wife or the child as hers, I see them both more as his children, and that kind of thwarts the feeling of her role being diminished. To me, these are two children who love their dad and stand behind him as he faces the harshness of the world for them. I mean, I love my dad very much, but I know that I can do him and lot better supporting him behind the scenes rather than jumping right up in his spot with him. And I feel better quietly knowing that I made him feel better. That's kind of, to me, what makes women great. While men face problems head on and fight the physical, women mend. Like water, they heal everything, smooth it all out in barely noticeable ways, and make everything functional.
So she's not being weak, she's supporting and she's mending, and even thought it takes a close eye to see it, that makes her strong. Very round-about comment, and I respect your opinion, I just want you to be able to enjoy this piece to the fullest without feeling negative about it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I had a feeling people would say something about the woman's placement
Okay, let's say she's not behind, she's in front of the dude but still in the middle because of the baby... Would there still be a problem?
There's nothing wrong with it. Couples hug like this
She could be comforting him, you know like those back hugs you give. Baby's just hugging mama
Plus its sequential, she married a tall guy.
Why? Why are people so quick to jump to negative conclusions? Why!?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not that I want to argue with you, but it's not so much her placement as is his prominence and the fact that he seems unaware of anything but the light. Her diminutive size, closed eyes, and apparent contentment to be almost literally over shadowed (none of that divine light is hitting her) and ignored are more or less what's making people uncomfortable. Another problem is she seems almost unaware of her child as all her attention and focus is on him. Not that I think this was the artists intention, but body language, the size of the figures, and the all the attention that is lavished on the man by what is going on in the painting all visual indicators of his, physical and emotional importance. By contrast, the woman and child are placed in lesser roles. They exist to boost his importance which I think resonates with how women and children have always been cast. Thus the discomfort and disquiet of some of the viewers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Stop attempting to paint yourself as some moral apologist. You are discomforted because you choose to be discomforted, nothing more.
This painting could be interpreted in a thousand ways, not least of which is the man protecting his wife as his wife protects the child. Perhaps that is the reason for him being in front. Perhaps that is the reason for his arms hanging limp as he is swept into the light of death. Perhaps anyone so inclined, could then go on a tangent about how this is misandry, always painting men as little more that disposable human shields. A man's life as less important. Perhaps they could, and would, if they were as desperate and entitled as yourself.
You project your vile nature onto the artist because your poisonous and propagandized mind forces you to do so. You must find exploitation, sexism, racism, etc, in everything -- and so you do. But do not confuse your self serving recognitions with reality. And if you must, at least have the courtesy to keep it to yourself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol it's just funny how you attack every commented under this painting who have different opinion. Who is now acting like a child?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This reminds me of a paiting by Kai Greene where he's hugging a woman and child (presumably his wife and son?) together unlike the sequential vibe ya got going here
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is beautiful. I love the expressions and that I actually want to think about it. Lovely work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I don't see anything wrong with the woman being placed behind the man, it wasn't meant to bring harm right? That's just how the artist chose to draw it, Either way this piece is so beautiful
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i fail to feel the need for having babies. So many reasons to avoid it in today's society it's not even funny. No i'm not 12, I was told i'd change my mind but the hatred for little shitty brats just grow each year. I hope i'll end up with a guy who dosen't want to marry nor have kids, both is a fucking waste of breath and time. (so many people having kids on "my behalf" I don't have to, and "everyone" is getting married then dump each other's ass within a few years).
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
You dont want kids, thats fine. No need to spew your hatred around.
With everything thats fucked up with the children of today is because of fucked up parents. 'Shitty brats'? You still shit out of your anus the same as a child.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
lol dafuck man? i still shit of my anus the same as a child? Im aware that children poop and are dumb copies of their parents, they'll grow and develop, but not much, and it takes years. Why can't i voice my opinion? I see baby/child friendly comments on facebook every day, i don't bitch about it to the people who post them. If you want tiny humans to feast offnof your body one way or an another for 18 years be my guest!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Why dont you tell me everything else you hate and dislike in this world.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
gladly. I dislike certain types of red sweets, because they taste way too artificial. I hate the weather, it rains everyday now, and it's getting darker. I hate cold coffee, and stale farts. And extremly insecure people. I dislike expensive chocolate and kissing before i've brushed my teeth in the morning. God this list is getting awfully long, i hate long lists.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Those things are on my list too. Thanks for sharing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
you're from australia, huh.. I was suppose to move there with my mother when i was 18.. she started planning when i was 12-13. then she found a guy and cancelled her plans. Wonderful. Life could of looked a lot different today. Have some Gays for me please, apperantly it's a delicious ice cream (unless i spelled it wrong. No homo)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, your life could have been awesome. Or loathsome.
Gays are delicious! God I could eat them all day. No homo.
(I wanna pun the shit out of this but)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yeah i've been curious for years since this aussie mentioned Gays. I just want to have a firm grip and curiously suck the top. No homo. How does it taste like?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I agree on the baby part, but not completely on the marriage.
We have too many people on this planet, and the generations that are being made so far are ignorant little assholes who take everything as one big JOKE.
The marriage thing is both, true and not true. Some marriages last a life-time, I blame online dating because that stuff can hook you up with another crazy person who would lie about their feelings toward you. People that get married then get dumped are usually ones who barely know each other personally.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
i agree, people should know each other for a few years before they decide to get married (if it's a big deal to them, they can wait. no need to rush shit). And there's too many people who dosen't know shit about parenting, ruining the next generation. I'll most likely fuck up my kid(s) if i were dumb enough to have some because of many reasons. I feel it's strange when people want me to "justify" why i'm not having children. There are plenty of reasons. They should be happy that i choose not to pollute this earth further by breeding like mad (i genuinely don't understand people who have five children. or more. jesus...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yeah, that kind of marraige!
Even the teachers today are to blame. did you hear that story about a teacher who was fired because all he did was his JOB? He corrected a student's grammer when she spoke to him in slang because no one at the schoolever told her that it was wrong to speak like that. I think he taught 5th grade? He got kicked out when the teachers started spreading rumors and complaining that he did things to students? (I think)
As for the populatiin, my mother always questions,me why I dont want kids, and I always answer with: "The population on our planet is going to reach 2 times the number of people existing here by the time my History teacher dies. I'm sure that the human race is fine without me.
Frankly, I don't care about dieing or seeing people die. The world is cruel and slowly dieing itself, I should care less about my own kind because its our fault this is happenning faster than Nature planned. The more we try to come out on top of the other person, the more damage we do to ourselves and our home.
My uncle has 7 kids, the only ones I like is my first and third cousin. Everyone else is a redneck ass.
No kids. No one out there worth to care about (atleast on Earth)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
dont base it on others actions, its what u want. also marriage is designed as a money scam (here in america) but thats a different subject.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Shell, Reflection, Core? Well whatever it symbolizes, it's very good.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is an amazing piece. I'm struck by how sad the man seems. I also find it interesting how the three of them are bathed in light, but all around them is shadow. I take it to symbolize that even in the darkest times, you can find light, love, and hope from your family. Like, maybe the man is deeply depressed, and his wife and child are giving him all their love so that he may find happiness once more? Isn't it awesome how art can mean so many things to so many people?
Also, amazing work with the anatomy of each person.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I agree with some of these people. I don't see what's so sexist about it. They say behind every good man, is a good woman so XD. I actully thought it was a picture, until I saw the baby and relized it's a painting. It's really well done.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I like the way you think, my friend
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I really loved this. It's so beautiful. And it raises so many questions within me.
I am kinda sorry about all the sexist views about this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
As beautiful as this painting is, I find it really sad that the woman is placed behind man/in man's shadow and child even further behind...
Isn't child what both man and woman should love the most? Why isn't the child the center, connecting both man and female?
Why female is not the one facing light as well? Why she has to embrace but the man neither wraps his arms around the woman and neither around his child?
It makes this image appear so cold. Making it look like woman and child are giving affection but not gaining any back.
👍: 0 ⏩: 4
So it´s sexist to paint a woman standing behind a man... I guess next time I see a man carrying something heavy or holding the door open for his wife I will tell him that it´s sexist and highly offensive to do so. Oh wait, that´s something completely different, right?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Are you all right in your head?
Neither there is anyone forced to carry anything for anyone in this picture, neither your point id valid.
Because,
If the man is carrying it, he is simply being gentleman, doing something out of his own free will? Unless you walk around seeing wives glue or chain to their husband's hands things to carry for them. Then in THAT CASE you might be right.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You didn´t get my point. To refer to your last sentences, I don´t see any wives forcing their husband to carry something for them but neither I see any husbands who force their wives to stand back in the shadows. All the sexism you see in this picture and this world is pretty much as made up as my argument. You see what you want to see.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You were the one saying that man carrying things for their woman is sexist.
I see what I see and it's sad that some people don't.
Sad that instead of agreeing that both man and women should be equal in this picture [not to mention background child left alone in basically dark...], you fight so much, for only man to be in the center the way he is right now.
Who is full of sexism now?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>