No. This is Not a Bird!
This stunning item, just landed in
my inbox. I could not resist sharing it. The parrot is in fact a woman who modeled for the fine art body painter, Johannes Stötter.
Using breathable paint, he spent hours painstakingly turning this woman into the image of a parrot, brushstroke by brushstroke. The model's arm forms the parrot's head
and beak, and her legs form
the wing and tail feathers.
Remember. Always take a closer look at what you see, because "things
are seldom what they seem."
Once you see the woman,
the parrot virtually disappears.
Now try to imagine how this optical illusion might apply to real life on any and all levels.
Once one sees the woman in this graphic, one can't help but see her.
ReplyDelete1. As is my wont, I liken this graphic to the whitewash of Islam. Once one takes a better look at the tenets of Islam, one sees the reality behind the facade to which we are so often exposed.
2. Politicians! Get past the veneer!
3. Many troublesome and/or underachieving students disguise themselves by announcing that they don't care about their work.
This comes to mind because of the something that happened yesterday in one of my classes.
One of my student received back her literary analysis with an "F" on that paper and vociferously bragged about her poor grade at lunch time. I'm not sure that she really is proud of herself as an underachiever; but the problem is she may well be. Strange dynamic with that girl, I tell ya!
BTW, the result of her bragging was universal disapproval from her peers. What's up with that?
------------------
Conversely, not everything in life is an optical illusion. Sometimes, "what you see is what you get."
The interesting thing about this graphic: both the parrot and the woman are beautiful and worthwhile -- in their own right. That is not always the case with disguises (that what shows and what doesn't is beautiful).
ReplyDeleteYes, AOW, except I would argue that the figure, though described in this morning's email as a woman, looks far more like a MAN to me in close examination. I've tried earnestly but cannot see a trace of "her" breasts, also "her" jawline and the set of "her" shoulders seem far more masculine than feminine to me.
DeleteThis makes me wonder if the person who originated this email, which of course I edited to make it look more presentable as I always do, was not having a little optical illusion joke of his own only to underscore the point of the item?
Please look again, and see if I may not be correct.
At best the human "parrot" figure is androgynous in the way that much of the highly stylized sculpture from the Art Deco period smooths over and deemphasizes the secondary sex characteristics of nude or semi-nude figures used to adorn the facades and interiors of public buildings in the 1920's and 30's.
The ideal feminine form changes from decade to decade.
DeleteYou mean from Venus de Milo, to Pompeii, to Rubens, to Scarlett O'Hara of sixteen-inch waist fame, to steatopygic Hottentots, to flat-chested flappers, to Marilyn Monroe to Twiggy, and all that?
DeleteYeah! It sure does.
FT,
DeleteI see the breasts -- rather small ones. The shoulders and upper arms are well muscled -- perhaps a bit too well muscled.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteANDROGYNOUS is the right word. Almost hermaphroditic. A very UNfeminine female.
DeleteSorry. Had to steal this. :)
ReplyDeleteNot to worry After all I stole it myself –– from an email. Besides, isn't imitation supposed to be the sincerest form of flattery? ;-)
DeleteIt's when imitation turns into MOCKERY that I start to squeal in protest –– and I can ALWAYS tell which is which.
Interesting post and great point. Our world is a veritable funhouse.
ReplyDeleteFunhouse? Yes in many ways it is, but I much prefer to think of it as an inexhaustible STOREHOUSE of GREAT TREASURE.
DeleteFor most people life CAN be a Great Adventure, a constant Learning Experience and a continual source of Joy in Wonder, if one constantly looks UPWARD and OUTWARD with ever-increasing CURIOSITY, instead of dwelling on nettlesome parochial concerns, tedious issues and insignificant minutiae about which we can do nothing anyway.