Shades of Life # 2 Foto & Bild | youth, subjects, long legs Bilder auf fotocommunity
Shades of Life # 2 Foto & Bild von Glenn Capers ᐅ Das Foto jetzt kostenlos bei fotocommunity.de anschauen & bewerten. Entdecke hier weitere Bilder.
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.
Füge den folgenden Link per 'Einfügen' in das Kommentarfeld der gewünschten Konversation im Messenger ein, um dieses Bild in der Nachricht zu versenden.
Link kopiert...
Klicke bitte auf den Link und verwende die Tastenkombination "Strg C" [Win] bzw. "Cmd C" [Mac] um den Link zu kopieren.
Peter D.. 14. Dezember 2012, 11:09
Such a strong image!s. sabine krause 3. November 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 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
+++pro+++Jörg Klüber 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
proPaula C 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
pro+++lolita cecilia 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
proEdwin Stocker 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
PRORuth Hutsteiner 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
+Fritz Eichmann 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
proChrista Regina 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
+++Frans G 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
+mike snead 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
proJURAFR 3. November 2012, 11:59 Voting-Anmerkung
+++John Mc D 3. November 2012, 11:58 Voting-Anmerkung
+Luigi Scorsino 3. November 2012, 11:58 Voting-Anmerkung
+++pro+++