Honestly top is fucking awesome to look at.
Yep, I would have been honored to have that on the exterior of my business 😌
I guarantee some Karen complained about the sexy Alice and that’s why it was removed
Well Alice was a 7-year-old, so yeah, that’s pretty gross.
I don’t care for sexualized depictions of Alice, considering the original character was seven years old, but the other ⅔ of it is pretty cool.
I wouldn’t want the leftmost painted on the side of my house, the rest are okay tho
deleted by creator
tbh yeah
It’s easier to explain to people than why I have some kinky sex game character painted there.
explain to people
Which people?
The other people in the world??
The fuck kinda question is that?
All due respect, if I saw that painting on the side of a house, or even a painting I don’t like come to that, I am not looking for an explanation.
Okay…
I don’t know what to tell you, everyone I speak to who’s seen it would get an explanation that I hadn’t paid for a kinky childhood character to be painted on the side of my house and I don’t want it there…
It’s Alice in wonderland
Alice is seven years old, dude.
Depends on the adaptation, in the Burton movie she’s 19
Whats interesting is that most people would consider the original to be art, and most people would consider just the cocks to not be art, but are the cocks with the statement of intent art or naw? If just the cocks are not art, and the cocks with the statement are, then do the cocks become art if the artist knows about the art that used to be there? Do they become art if the viewer knows about the cocks and infers the missing statement? That’s the interesting question here, because it implies that the piece can be art to one person who knows the context and not art to another person who is only aware of the cocks.
“Art is art because is is art and not because we say that it is art.” - Hoid, Words of Radiance, Brandon Sanderson
