I've been drawing a lot of castles lately for some reason. This one didn't start out to be so philogynist, but I guess it kind of is. I'm not a feminist by any means, but I cannot deny the implications of differences between the two structures.
TOP CASTLE:
The top castle is very stoic in appearance. It is what we are normally exposed to as the "standard" for castles in fairy tales, cartoons, and the like. I was vaguely aware of it while doing the sketch, although not entirely conscious of it. The cliff is eroding beneath it & its moat is filling up the pool for the castle below. It wasn't until I started drawing the second castle that I realized how fragile of a position the top castle really was in.
BOTTOM CASTLE:
The bottom castle is everything the top castle is, but more decorated for lack of a better word. AND, it is less vulnerable. It sits on solid ground & has lush hills with livestock behind it. It is full & alive & opulent, but it is being fed from the dying stream above.
Together the castles play off each other. This piece is more sexually tense than I ever set out to create. It wasn't until the tower curved that I realized the gravity of the precarious placement of such a sturdy ediface. In my life I have realized that men are exactly that way. They are chronically needy & emotionally damaged creatures who only know how to gain acceptance by creating illusions of grandiose stature. It is how they feed their naturally low self esteems. They will do just about anything for acceptance, albeit by a woman, a colleague, an audience or God, itself.
This is not to say that women are superior. Women will take anything they can get in order to position themselves into a chair of comfort, including dirty runoff water from an old man's moat.
No comments:
Post a Comment