My food's not rendering correctly.

I'm amazed this one post got flagged five times in the span of 11 days.

Based in the messages left on this one, seems like the Approvers are having a lot of fun.

Looking at the moderation history on this, the Mod Squad™ needs to bonk someone, and I'm not sure who.

Alanis, choked on a fish

I think that this Artwork (for that is what it is - a piece of Art) is a deep critique to our Society.
It's not a bad Artwork, it's purposefully bad. It wants to break free of the dichotomy that is "Approved" and "Rejected", decided purely by arbitrary standards set by people. And thus, we become part of the Artwork itself. The dead fish in this still life Artwork may be dead, but we are living, breathing beings. It evokes Emotions, discussion, and thus it undergoes rebirth inside of our heart, becoming more memorable than "conventional" artworks. It reaches an apotheosis where the arbitrariness of both sides are revealed, an eden where lines are blurred. The fact that this Artwork has been approved and flagged 5 times in 11 days is proof of it.
I suggest to everyone criticizing this Artwork to take a long, hard look at themselves. Is the Artwork truly seeking our approval? Or are we, seeking the Artwork's approval?

Login_to_view said:

I think that this Artwork (for that is what it is - a piece of Art) is a deep critique to our Society.
It's not a bad Artwork, it's purposefully bad. It wants to break free of the dichotomy that is "Approved" and "Rejected", decided purely by arbitrary standards set by people. And thus, we become part of the Artwork itself. The dead fish in this still life Artwork may be dead, but we are living, breathing beings. It evokes Emotions, discussion, and thus it undergoes rebirth inside of our heart, becoming more memorable than "conventional" artworks. It reaches an apotheosis where the arbitrariness of both sides are revealed, an eden where lines are blurred. The fact that this Artwork has been approved and flagged 5 times in 11 days is proof of it.
I suggest to everyone criticizing this Artwork to take a long, hard look at themselves. Is the Artwork truly seeking our approval? Or are we, seeking the Artwork's approval?

feeshe

Login_to_view said:

I think that this Artwork (for that is what it is - a piece of Art) is a deep critique to our Society.
It's not a bad Artwork, it's purposefully bad. It wants to break free of the dichotomy that is "Approved" and "Rejected", decided purely by arbitrary standards set by people. And thus, we become part of the Artwork itself. The dead fish in this still life Artwork may be dead, but we are living, breathing beings. It evokes Emotions, discussion, and thus it undergoes rebirth inside of our heart, becoming more memorable than "conventional" artworks. It reaches an apotheosis where the arbitrariness of both sides are revealed, an eden where lines are blurred. The fact that this Artwork has been approved and flagged 5 times in 11 days is proof of it.
I suggest to everyone criticizing this Artwork to take a long, hard look at themselves. Is the Artwork truly seeking our approval? Or are we, seeking the Artwork's approval?

This post about the supposed "Artwork" is a prime example of pretentiousness masquerading as insight. The attempt to frame a low-quality drawing of a meal, including a fish, as some profound critique of society is nothing short of laughable. This forum is dedicated to high-quality anime art, and what you've posted is a crude and uninspired sketch that doesn't belong here. Let's dissect the absurdity of your claims step by step.

First, your insistence on calling this drawing a "deep critique to our Society" is both grandiose and unfounded. The piece lacks the technical skill and creativity that are essential to meaningful art. Instead of offering any real commentary, it appears to be a hastily done sketch that fails to communicate anything of substance. Claiming it is "purposefully bad" is a transparent attempt to shield yourself from valid criticism. If every poor piece of art could be excused as intentionally bad, then there would be no standards at all.

Your notion that this drawing seeks to "break free of the dichotomy that is 'Approved' and 'Rejected'" is a tired and clichéd argument often used to justify mediocrity. Standards exist for a reason: they maintain the quality and integrity of a community. This piece doesn't challenge these standards in any meaningful way; it simply doesn't meet them. Art doesn't need to be conventionally beautiful to be powerful, but it does need to be executed with a degree of skill and thought that this drawing severely lacks.

The comparison of the dead fish in your drawing to living, breathing beings is another strained metaphor that falls flat. It doesn’t evoke emotions beyond confusion and disappointment. True art indeed evokes discussion and emotions, but it does so through mastery of technique and a clear conveyance of the artist's message. Your drawing, unfortunately, fails on both counts. It does not undergo "rebirth inside our heart"; it is more likely to be quickly forgotten, overshadowed by genuinely impactful artwork.

Your claim that this artwork reaches an "apotheosis" where arbitrariness is revealed is both pretentious and misleading. The notion that this piece has been flagged multiple times is not evidence of its profundity but rather of its inappropriateness for this gallery. High standards are not arbitrary; they are cultivated through years of appreciation and understanding of what constitutes quality art.

Lastly, suggesting that critics should "take a long, hard look at themselves" is a poor attempt at deflection. The role of a critic is to evaluate the merits of a piece based on established standards and personal insight. The criticism your piece receives is not a reflection of the viewers' flaws but of the drawing's inadequacies. Instead of demanding that viewers seek the artwork's approval, perhaps consider whether the artwork is worthy of it.

In conclusion, your post, dear <!replace with user name before posting!>, is an exercise in overblown rhetoric, attempting to disguise a lackluster piece as something revolutionary. This community values high standards and genuine artistic talent, both of which your drawing fails to demonstrate. If you wish to contribute to an anime gallery that prides itself on quality, your work must meet the expectations of that community, not hide behind empty philosophical jargon.

Login to View said:

: 📜

nonamethanks said:
📜

I come here to see big boobs, instead I get philosopher about modern art

I think this image might be ai-generated. You can see how the red liquid inside the glass goes past the boundary off the glass itself.
It's very subtle and you might miss it if your don't zoom in, but it's a red flag.

Does fellatiating yourself with a fish count as bestiality?

@albert03 please stop littering the mod queue with appeals for this image.
It's just white noise at that point.

This goes for every person trying to appeal this.

Provence is right, the normal rainbow-turd scat in queue is way more enjoyable and this post gets in the way by taking up 1 in 1700 queue slots.

/s jesus that hurt to type

岩戸鈴芽 said:

Provence is right, the normal rainbow-turd scat in queue is way more enjoyable and this post gets in the way by taking up 1 in 1700 queue slots.

/s jesus that hurt to type

Imagine every deleted post gets appealed 5 billion times in one week.
Exactly.

Provence said:

Imagine every deleted post gets appealed 5 billion times in one week.
Exactly.

Sadly there's only one person doing that, and we don't have enough users to appeal a post 5 billion times anyway.

岩戸鈴芽 said:

Sadly there's only one person doing that, and we don't have enough users to appeal a post 5 billion times anyway.

I'm inclined thinking you don't get the issue.

Provence said:

I'm inclined thinking you don't get the issue.

Prop yourself or your chair up then, it's not good for you to sit at an incline. You don't want to get back issues over a feeshe post.

"inclined to think" might have been better wording, but from Merriam-Webster:

inclined adjective

in·​clined in-ˈklīnd, sense 2 also ˈin-ˌklīnd

1: having inclination, disposition, or tendency
2a: having a leaning or slope
2b: making an angle with a line or plane

The intended meaning (1) is apparently more common than the literal one you're making it out to be (2a).

runninghomeharuka said:

By Ange

No way it's a Kemo feeshe

Here's the approver messages after it got flagged for the fifth time (because they don't get saved).

Tkmiz animated the ED by himself. I think that's an impressive artistic feat not many 漫画家 has achieved.

lol its just a fish drawing calm down guys

Aww man, why people so mean to the fish? :(