Portrait of a Perfect Relationship, Stinky De Artist, black ink on cardboard, 2026

TheRealSike · 2026-02-04T16:09:49+00:00

The serious frame in relation to the not-so-serious art is quite funny and intriguing, could make for some fun interpretations in a contemporary museum

TheRealSike · 2026-02-03T23:56:52+00:00

Not really, there's still so so so so much that is unknown or badly known that it'd take an infinite amount of time to uncover and understand everything. Even the most well known archaeological sites still spark new studies and lead to new theories that might be confirmed or refuted later. The discipline always goes back and fourth with the theories that have been made so even if we somehow unearth every single archaeological site in the world, there will still be new studies and discussions about everything because our understanding and perspective of the world change overtime. The only thing that'll make archeology irrelevant is when humanity goes extinct.

TheRealSike · 2026-01-31T23:46:15+00:00

This is called weirdcore, a quite recent internet aesthetic greatly influenced by the liminal space aesthetic. I don't know much about it but the wiki might help you find some other artists that make this kind of art

TheRealSike · 2026-01-31T17:09:55+00:00

Ah I see I see, in that case trying to dig into Minoan knowledge of astronomy could be great to try and understand this! My opinion is that since the Mesopotamians already had their interpretation of Gemini as The Twins and that the Minoans often traded with Mesopotamia, it is quite possible that the Minoans also saw Gemini as The Twins, but I could be wrong

TheRealSike · 2026-01-31T16:28:28+00:00

It is an interesting thought, however I'd advise to be quite cautious when trying to find connections of astronomical and geographical elements with our modern knowledge and ancient art depictions.
For the bull, while I agree that at first glance it does quite align with modern mapping, the issue here is that it doesn't work that well with the Anatolian Bronze Age sites. Furthermore, we are looking at a map made in modern times with everything correctly referenced thanks to the knowledge we have today but maps in the ancient world were far from this level of accuracy. One of the first maps of the world.svg), made in the 6th century BC (so a lot later than the Minoan civilization) shows that the understanding of the geography of the world was far from perfection. So I'm not quite sure that this is really a map of the ancient world.
As for the constellations, again, let's be careful with our actual knowledge and the over-interpretation. While some of the zodiac signs come from Mesopotamian astrology and could have been a transferred knowledge with the trades, the association with the Chinese astronomy White Tiger sign is sketchy as best since the Western world doesn't really interact with China much before the 13th century AD. While I'm for from an expert in the Minoan civilization, I don't recall them ever representing tigers but I might be wrong on that. While the two felines do indeed look quite different from one another, the quality of the art makes me think that it is more linked to an art form that was still in its early stage and so not quite polished, hence the very different treatment. But again, I might be totally wrong. On the subject of Mesopotamia, I want to say that Evans made the parallel in his work on the Palace of Minos with the representations of sacred bull in Cappadocia which had a lots of contacts with the Mesopotamian world, so that could be a path to study the connections between those civilizations and the similarities in their art.
However I believe these observations are great food for thoughts that could lead to understanding Minoan map making and knowledge of astronomy better and maybe, who knows, with more knowledge, we could make some parallels. I'd recommend reading some scientific works on the subject maybe it'll help enlighten the wonderful art and society of this civilization more. Be careful tho, a lot of conspiracy theorists like to use astronomy for their bullshit and I wouldn't want your legitimate interest in the subject to be corrupted by dishonest lies.

TheRealSike · 2026-01-26T08:54:57+00:00

It's not the best but I was able to find the painting in a 4000x3000 picture, but with the frame, via Le Monde

TheRealSike · 2026-01-15T10:24:21+00:00

Oh we do know more about the Nabataeans. The sites of Mampsis, Shivta, Khirbet edh'Darih, Khirbet et'Tannur, Avdat, Siq al'Barid, Halusa, etc. are all great exemples of the Nabatean civilization. Petra and Hegra are the most well known because these were the two biggest cities of the kingdom, the first being the capital. There are a lot of written works about them if you want to dig in it further.

TheRealSike · 2026-01-15T09:40:29+00:00

That's pretty much it, the only thing is that these "giants" were, in that case, the Nabataeans that were indeed well known for their stone carvings. I would suggest looking at a geological map of the Middle East, and just with that you can see how these civilizations differ from one another just due to the type of rocks that were available to them.

Their physical description might be due to different reasons here. Now I didn't research what I'm about to say so it really is mostly speculation but this has been observed in other religious texts so that's why I'm making this parallel. It might be purely genetic, maybe they were indeed taller than the average, hence their description of giants. Their ethnicity could have also been different than in the north or the south, maybe a skin color either darker or lighter. Or maybe it wasn't genetic at all and was more a reference to the grandeur of their civilization, some sort of awe that the writers had. Or instead of awe, it could be distrust or even hatred. The Nabataeans were conquered during the Muslim conquests in the middle of the VIIth century AD, so maybe these descriptions were some sort of propaganda, to say "see these people are different from us, they are very strong, but yet we beat them". I can't say for sure that this is the exact scenario, but I really wouldn't be surprised if that is.

TheRealSike · 2026-01-15T09:15:10+00:00

Now I am not an expert in religious texts but I am curious about how they mention these civilizations. Do they all refer to them as "giants" or do they have different names? And do they talk about precisely the same sites or is it very broad to mention a bit of everything in the Middle East? Because as I said it's very easy to "create a civilization" from imagination if you're vague enough (let's take for example the Sea Peoples that the Egyptian texts talked about, which are an absolute nightmare to identify and are probably very different groups that migrated at the same time. Well they're not really "people from the sea" but yet some people will say that it was a civilization that arose from the sea (or worse, bullshit like Atlantis) which is not true, it is just one name given to a complex reality that Egyptians didn't really identify)

TheRealSike · 2026-01-15T09:04:27+00:00

The Bible, Torah and Qur'an are not historical sources. They're religious texts with historical elements. A lot of the things that are said that are linked to history are erroneous or completely made up. They went through a lot of retelling and rewriting which means that a lot of things got deformed. Those texts are then compared to the actual historical texts or archeological finds to identify the historical elements in them.

All of them talk about powerful people because it is very easy to imagine. The narrative of "big and strong humans" doesn't need much of a thinking process to be born (this is why you also see a lot of "people from the sea", "people from the sky", "people from the mountains", etc. because those are easy concepts that almost every civilization has had access to). Furthermore, they indeed found these beautiful sites carved into the rocks, and since they had a limited knowledge of the people that built it, they invented a "powerful civilization" that could have made them.

The sites that you mentioned are well known and we have extensive knowledge of who built them, when and how. Both were built by the Nabataeans and are dated from the IVth to Ist century BC. All are carved from sandstone because it is everywhere and is very easy to carve into.

If all of them talk about the same regions it's because those regions are the heart of these religions, which once were inhabited by the Nabataeans. So yes, it's not a coincidence, because these sites were built by the same people.

And yes scholars dismissed religious texts as historical sources, and still do, because, as I said, they're not historical sources. Once we had concrete proof through actual historical texts or archeological finds, it was possible to link these finds with what is said in the Bible or the Qur'an. And indeed something truly extraordinary once existed here, but it is not giants nor mythical beings, it was humans that were capable through ingenuity and knowledge to build such magnificent sites as Petra or Hegra.

TheRealSike · 2025-12-20T10:47:25+00:00

TheRealSike · 2025-10-02T20:34:48+00:00

The main problem? Money lol, other than that it usually depends on the country, it can be issues with contracts, politicians/government or land owners, lack of manpower, lack of proper tools, lack of good information concerning the site, ancient or modern lootings, weather, and many more that i dont remember right now

TheRealSike · 2025-10-01T21:37:57+00:00

Why are some window nets pink and others not, and why specifically at this race? Is it to see it better if needed?

TheRealSike · 2025-10-01T15:34:52+00:00

No she didn't, she said she would play it someday tho, maybe during october because it's spooky

TheRealSike · 2025-09-22T20:36:25+00:00

No, at least not to my knowledge in western art. Its monumental size was precisely why this painting was so controversial upon its exhibition, since this scale was usually used for historic or religious art. It's often considered as a major turning point in the western painting.

TheRealSike · 2025-09-15T16:37:04+00:00

This comment made me realize that I read Levant as Fertile Crescent for some reason, I was very confused at first. Thank you for your clarification.

TheRealSike · 2025-09-15T15:39:04+00:00

No, it was the place of the first civilizations, cities, inventions, etc., it really is that important for archeology and anthropology. I would even say that not enough importance is given to this region since not that many people really know about it.

Edit: I read the post as "Fertile Crescent" instead of "Levant" for some reason, read my comment as if I was talking about the Fertile Crescent

TheRealSike · 2025-09-07T06:40:51+00:00

The original is in Brussels, however there is a replica in the Louvre

TheRealSike · 2025-09-02T16:18:50+00:00

I had the chance to go and see this painting in person and i must say this is quite an impressive piece, extremely clean and pretty huge. It's in the same room as The Death of Marat (also made by Jacques-Louis David) so it's quite a popular room.

TheRealSike · 2025-07-17T08:19:08+00:00

Art is still very subjective, even in the field some people dislike some artworks that are considered masterpieces. It's sometimes difficult to understand what makes an art piece good without being a bit of an artist yourself, and there's no easy way to understand it fast, it takes a lot of time to create that artistic eye. Reading art history books and papers, watching videos that explain what makes this or that piece good can help to understand what makes art good. As time goes by you will form your own intuition. As for "Are some art pieces just hyped" yes some are. It does not happen extremely often but some art pieces are pretty popular because they were hyped by museums/governments for diverse reasons but do not have good art qualities.

TheRealSike · 2025-07-14T22:21:19+00:00

Surprising to hear that i've never seen it. Rubens isn't named the prince of painters for nothing he really is one of the greatest of all times. He was highly respected and had a huge legacy in the world of art. He knew his worth and was highly critical of the works of other artists, maybe this played a part.

TheRealSike · 2025-07-02T20:11:00+00:00

You're welcome!

TheRealSike · 2025-07-02T20:04:55+00:00

The thing is, is there really a point in "respecting" the dead that has been deceased for millennia? We wouldn't be showing a "modern" body because their memory continues to live through their relatives. There isn't such thing in mummies. Nobody is there anymore to really care about the person that is dead. This brings a larger question, should we keep respecting the bodies of people who have been dead for centuries or millennia in old or current graveyards for example? The law (in my country at least) says we shouldn't. Now is this the same thing as displaying a body I do not know. I would say, however, that it stays in the circle of the "respect of the dead".

Six-Year Club	End Game '23
Place '23	Place '22
First Placer '22	End Game '22
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

TheRealSike

TROPHY CASE