/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6689714
>he is exploring his own mind ... it's a psychological coping mechanism and a method to know thyself through the junction between mind and body.
this guy gets it.
see also: Robert Crumb

>>6560449
>unnecessary sexualization
naw, it's the role of sex in the art—because sexuality is an essential element of the human psyche, it cannot be deemed 'unnecessary.'
An artist like Crumb is a good example—someone who explores his id and shadow through rather crude depictions of sex.
Yet when sex in art becomes mere commodity, catering to fetishes with little reflection, then of course it becomes soulless.
But the lines blur—why did Eric Stanton have more soul than the average coom artist of today? Maybe because despite working for the mail order sleaze market, he still revealed psyche in his work.

Most great art is made by iconoclasts who don't easily fit in any box. Crumb is a good example, his stuff pisses off liberals and conservatives.

>>6397015
>Where is the border between coom and art?
Robert Crumb

I haven't started yet but have decided to post everything under one name. I'll go the Crumb route and lewd stuff will be part of my artistic identity along with whatever other shit I decide to draw.
Getting off the ground is hard enough without having to manage multiple identities.
Having said that, I have no ambitions to work at Disney or any shit like that. I don't blame anyone for wanting to keep SFW separate from NSFW.

ok time for some crumb