/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6966054
>Now think in lens of a consumer/non-artist.
>Artist are more draw in those aspects
I see where your idea comes from, but you're incorrect on this one.
I reiterate, hands and eyes are the first thing we, as humans, are drawn towards by instinct, it's where we identify humanity and gesture, it's psychological and it's present in all of us as many other reptilian behaviors.

Hands and eyes are not elements that only artists are drawn towards because we are already drawn towards them as viewers. There's nothing that our "artistic eye" can scope that our "human eye" hasnt scoped already; because before being artists, we are viewers, never the other way round.

>>6757511
>I just don't get why it's "globohomo" to care about the environment.
Because that's not the point.
One thing is caring about the environment by doing what you're supposed to be taught in elementary school like not littering, not wasting water, be nice to plants, save electricity, recycle, etc... and a completely different one is prohibiting yourself from certain things in favor of "the environment", such as not farming/eating meat and buying expensive-yet lower quality, "ecological" products.
The most contributions you can make to the the environment are through the little things, yet there's a massive propaganda about the bigger picture and how this meaningless things are going to supposedly improve it the long term, when in reality the setbacks are too high for you as a consumer and the payoffs for the environment are too little, with the only people winning here are the corpos you're falling for.