Comment on Sower of Discord by jflaxman
The grim one, with the naked bald guy dispensing purely religious symbols (which I figured was both ballsy and absolutely spot on).
It also looked more like a real painting -with a perhaps message- than a hissy fit from an teenage boy listening to Iron Maiden all day long.
It also looked more like a real painting -with a perhaps message- than a hissy fit from an teenage boy listening to Iron Maiden all day long.
My, those typos. Sheesh... -_-
Need sleep.
Need sleep.
No need to apologise. The first version featured a robed figure and dates from late high school (I listened to a lot of Maiden, so your comment cracked me up). Most of my friends preferred the robed figure so I went back to it the third time round.
I've got mixed thoughts about this piece. I don't normally use such lurid colours but I wanted to try something new.
The first version also dated from a time when I felt all religion was evil, but these days that seems a little simplistic (indeed adolescent hissy fit). My conscience compelled me to add other symbols. The monotheistic faiths have historically been the most divisive, but secular ideologies that share some of their worst attributes have also done the world great harm. If National Socialism and Communism (for example) have been less durable than Christianity, Islam, etc. it's because the very human failings of their equally human "gods" are more evident. Traditional gods only have to deliver their promises in a presumed afterlife and will always be infallible in the minds of their followers.
The strength of all these ideologies - religious and otherwise - is their ability to unite and inspire people of a given race, class or faith; but all tend to demonise outsiders, often to their detriment. I've touched on the four main factors above; removing one or more from any doctrine would make it less dangerous. Two non-exclusionist religions could peacefully coexist (as often happened in pre-Christian Europe, where different pantheons were merged) while an intensely nationalistic, but non-expansionist dictator, might prove more successful than one whose popularity depended on repeated military victories (compare the histories of Pinochet, Franco, Napoleon and Mussolini).
On a purely aesthetic note, everyone's got their own ideas, and I think this concept's strong enough to revisit yet again. You may see another version some day!