Shades of Life # 2 Imagen & Foto | youth, subjects, long legs Fotos de fotocommunity
Shades of Life # 2 Imagen & Foto de Glenn Capers ᐅ Mira y evalúa la foto de manera gratuita en fotocommunity.es. Descubre más fotos aquí.
don't you just love it, when you get all those interesting contra feedbacks! ; )) gosh, the gallery is a place to despair… if i could have voted, my first impulse might have been to vote contra because when first looking at your image, i got the feeling that its message is maybe a little "too obvious": legs vs. no legs. the upward glance which comes in handy for interpretations like: does he wish he had legs? does he envy those people with legs passing him? no, no, of course he doesn't! there's absolutely no need to envy them! just look at his toned upper body: a man who doesn't need to be pitied. a man who bravely fights back etc. etc. i don't know, but for some reason this kind of an all too pc, maybe even a little tacky interpretation is making me uneasy. but maybe the reason for my uneasiness is buried a little deeper. maybe i feel there's a mirror being held up to my face, showing me my own akward and taboo-stricken reaction to the subject of a legless man looking up at a group of long-legged girls "strolling towards him". why doesn't anyone interpret the situation like he or she would, if he or she were looking at a perfectly "able-bodied" young man in the same situation: wouldn't we all humorously remark on his glance, say something like this: "boys will be boys, the moment a beautiful girl strolls by, they start ogling her legs! ; ))" now why don't we here? why do we readily remark on his bravery, his heroism? maybe it's because we feel that in his case it just wouldn't be appropriate? is it his very handicap that, figuratively speaking, makes us emasculate him? now does that make sense at all? well, to make a long comment short ; ): my uneasiness prevails. but uneasiness about a picture, a forced look into the mirror of one's own prejudices, is a good thing, isn't it? and the pictures that make us uneasy are also the pictures that move us! i think i'm now lean toward a possible pro ; )). well, in any case, this would have been my try at an explanation for my vote… ; ) the silent majority is a pain in the neck! greetings, sabine.
Incorpora el siguiente enlace en el campo de comentarios de la conversación deseada en Messenger utilizando 'Pegar' para enviar esta imagen en el mensaje.
El enlace ha sido copiado...
Por favor haz clic en el enlace y utiliza la combinación de teclas "Ctrl" [Win] o "Cmd" [Mac] para copiar el enlace.
Peter D.. 14/12/2012 11:09
Such a strong image!s. sabine krause 03/11/2012 14:14
don't you just love it, when you get all those interesting contra feedbacks! ; )) gosh, the gallery is a place to despair… if i could have voted, my first impulse might have been to vote contra because when first looking at your image, i got the feeling that its message is maybe a little "too obvious": legs vs. no legs. the upward glance which comes in handy for interpretations like: does he wish he had legs? does he envy those people with legs passing him? no, no, of course he doesn't! there's absolutely no need to envy them! just look at his toned upper body: a man who doesn't need to be pitied. a man who bravely fights back etc. etc. i don't know, but for some reason this kind of an all too pc, maybe even a little tacky interpretation is making me uneasy. but maybe the reason for my uneasiness is buried a little deeper. maybe i feel there's a mirror being held up to my face, showing me my own akward and taboo-stricken reaction to the subject of a legless man looking up at a group of long-legged girls "strolling towards him". why doesn't anyone interpret the situation like he or she would, if he or she were looking at a perfectly "able-bodied" young man in the same situation: wouldn't we all humorously remark on his glance, say something like this: "boys will be boys, the moment a beautiful girl strolls by, they start ogling her legs! ; ))" now why don't we here? why do we readily remark on his bravery, his heroism? maybe it's because we feel that in his case it just wouldn't be appropriate? is it his very handicap that, figuratively speaking, makes us emasculate him? now does that make sense at all? well, to make a long comment short ; ): my uneasiness prevails. but uneasiness about a picture, a forced look into the mirror of one's own prejudices, is a good thing, isn't it? and the pictures that make us uneasy are also the pictures that move us! i think i'm now lean toward a possible pro ; )). well, in any case, this would have been my try at an explanation for my vote… ; ) the silent majority is a pain in the neck! greetings, sabine.poorboytommy 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
+++pro+++Jörg Klüber 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
proPaula C 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
pro+++lolita cecilia 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
proEdwin Stocker 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
PRORuth Hutsteiner 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
+Fritz Eichmann 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
proChrista Regina 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
+++Frans G 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
+mike snead 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
proJURAFR 03/11/2012 11:59 Comentario de la votación
+++John Mc D 03/11/2012 11:58 Comentario de la votación
+Luigi Scorsino 03/11/2012 11:58 Comentario de la votación
+++pro+++