That is not thread!

I wouldn't believe this was oil paint even if you told me! that's how stunning it looks

The Codex Seraphinianus is an illustrated encyclopedia of an imaginary world, created by Italian artist, architect and industrial designer Luigi Serafini between 1976 and 1978. It is approximately 360 pages (depending on edition) and written in an imaginary language.

The Codex is an encyclopedia in manuscript with copious hand-drawn, colored-pencil illustrations of bizarre and fantastical flora, fauna, anatomies, fashions, and foods. The illustrations are often surreal parodies of things in the real world, such as a bleeding fruit, a plant that grows into roughly the shape of a chair and is subsequently made into one, and a copulating couple who metamorphose into an alligator.

From Wikipedia

I saw this and now you have to.

this

so much this

the disparity between posters and subscribers is larger than expected.

in the community i moderate, there are just 2 consistent posters (including myself) and about 3000 subs, of which a good 150 seem to be active in total. that's 0.05 of the aggregate subscribers.

I created [email protected] for this exact reason

faxolotl

the real question should be: does it count as "art" in the first place, which is a question the art community has been trying to find the answer to since the last 107 years since it's been published.

I know next to nothing about art history and art movements but what i find really interesting is how its able to divide the community in half (as evidenced by the ratio of upvotes to downvotes on this very post)

It's a piece of art that makes you ask what is art in the first place.Now I agree one could probably poop on a plate or tape a banana to an exhibit wall to raise the same question, but Duchamp's works are iconic enough in the realm of modernism to warrant a discussion in the least.

As for it being traditional art or not, This community was created to promote any and all art that is "non-digital" in nature, so at least fountain falls under that umbrella.

there's something so ethereal and majestic about paintings that make humans subjects look like ants chilling around megastructures.

Is this racist? It looks like it might be racist. Black hunched over and big nose, could easily be pretty problematic.

Let's see, here's what M.C Escher himself had to say about it:

"Out from the grey surface of a back wall there develops a complicated pattern of white and black figures of little men. And since men who desire to live need at least a floor to walk on, a floor has been designed for them, with a circular gap in the middle so that as much as possible can still be seen of the back wall. In this way they are forced not only to walk in a ring, but also meet each other in the foreground: a white optimist and a black pessimist shaking hands with one another. The optimist has his hand open, as a gesture of friendship. The pessimist has his finger raised, as a warning. Yet they shake hands, which lends the print a touch of the encouraging in these times of war."

Source : https://www.escherinhetpaleis.nl/escher-today/encounter/?lang=en

Diogenes was a Greek philosopher who was known for living in a ceramic jar, disrupting Plato's lessons by eating loudly, urinating on people who insulted him, and pointing his middle finger at random people. He was also noted for having mocked Alexander the Great, both in public and to his face when he visited Corinth in 336 BC.

Reduces the printing cost I imagine.