I did not for even a second believe the artist was looking to depict a realistic view of a particular species, just the standard cultural view of early humans (ie so easy a caveman could do it). So no, I was not wondering.
You have nothing to base that off of because you aren’t the artist are you? All I see is an artist who has good varied character design, a character with admittedly a unibrow, and two people on the internet getting offended over something nonsensical.
^ This person does not understand how critique works. Sad shame.
You don’t need to be the artist to form an understanding of the artwork, use context clues to ascertain meaning, or intuit subtle ideas. It’s visual art after all, not prose.
Further, identifying an ugly quality which is presented plainly doesn’t mean we’re offended by it, it means we’re observed something the creator showed to us. …or do you automatically assume anything you don’t like is bad? I probably should have asked but, are you very young?
You clearly don’t have an understanding of the artwork, you’ve made an assumption of a depiction based off of a stylistic choice. E.g (monobrow equals neanderthal) and did you really just ask that while automatically assuming I’m very young?
That would be like me assuming since you immediately resorted to attempting to attack me as a person you have low intelligence and are a bad debater, but I would never assume something so crass.
I didn’t make that assumption… you’re confusing me with Mac who made comment which started the discussion. Adults with fully developed brains tend to be a little better at storing and recalling information like this, just FYI. Stay in school.
Homie that’s just the art style, look at how fucked up the professor dude looks. No one is saying hoarders are Neanderthals but you
deleted by creator
Homo habilus, in case you were wondering
I did not for even a second believe the artist was looking to depict a realistic view of a particular species, just the standard cultural view of early humans (ie so easy a caveman could do it). So no, I was not wondering.
I reject your comment.
It’s clearly the intent.
You have nothing to base that off of because you aren’t the artist are you? All I see is an artist who has good varied character design, a character with admittedly a unibrow, and two people on the internet getting offended over something nonsensical.
So a normal Monday
do i have to be the artist to interpret art?
^ This person does not understand how critique works. Sad shame.
You don’t need to be the artist to form an understanding of the artwork, use context clues to ascertain meaning, or intuit subtle ideas. It’s visual art after all, not prose.
Further, identifying an ugly quality which is presented plainly doesn’t mean we’re offended by it, it means we’re observed something the creator showed to us. …or do you automatically assume anything you don’t like is bad? I probably should have asked but, are you very young?
You clearly don’t have an understanding of the artwork, you’ve made an assumption of a depiction based off of a stylistic choice. E.g (monobrow equals neanderthal) and did you really just ask that while automatically assuming I’m very young?
That would be like me assuming since you immediately resorted to attempting to attack me as a person you have low intelligence and are a bad debater, but I would never assume something so crass.
I didn’t make that assumption… you’re confusing me with Mac who made comment which started the discussion. Adults with fully developed brains tend to be a little better at storing and recalling information like this, just FYI. Stay in school.
Nice comeback, really burned me