🐮 Lolcow Jack David Sickenberger / The Cunning Condor - Prudish, Nosy, and Pretentious Cartoonist who Hates WHORES and makes REAL ART

  • 🔧 Issue with uploading attachments resolved.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Kittentits said:
So what I'm getting from this thread is you're drawing badly on purpose then? Also you are far from humble kid, honest or not, no one likes that.
Click to expand...
No, I'm structuring it the way it is with intention. Art is more than simply looking pretty.

Locksnap said:
I don't think you're getting what I'm saying dude. I know you don't intend them to be erotic. What I'm saying is that you don't really have a leg to stand on when you criticise other artists when you yourself aren't producing anything particularly skilful or creative. Unless, of course, the only problem you have with erotica is that its erotic, not that its devoid of artistic content. Thats what I'm starting to feel you really think.
Click to expand...
*everything I posted above
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Cunning Condor said:
I don't think you like me.
Click to expand...

I am a very harsh critic, sir. I have high standards. I think your artwork is shit. But you yourself are tolerable to talk to; I would even go so far as to say you border on being pleasant. But you are still a hypocrite and your work is still shit and you should realize that if you want to progress as an artist. That's the point I was making before.
 
Globe said:
Okay, to repeat a question Saney had, in the comic strips that made it to this thread, the "woman" character was ditzy, superficial, or promiscuous. I can't speak for the rest of your art, but is ALL of it like that? If so, why?
Click to expand...
That particular character (none of them are named. This is intentional) is given that personality. I plan to add in more varied characters as they go along. Dun worreh.

Treblinkachu said:
I have high standards.
Click to expand...
Ding ding ding.

Balance is one of the most important aspects of this universe.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Cunning Condor said:
Ooooooh dawgy.

Okay so, while visual art is of course meant to be looked at, anything can be "looked at". I prefer the kind of art that makes the viewer think. Gets their imagination up n runnin'. I like the kind of art that can inspire all sorts of different ideas from all sorts of different viewers. Much more imaginative than a run of the mill landscape, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

That drawing made me think "This looks like some boring-ass high school bullshit."

You're not as deep as you think you are.
 
Treblinkachu said:
Naturally, there must be a deep, profound, and meaningful reason for you drawing cartoons of women. Certainly not that you want to draw pictures of women. Nahhhh.
Click to expand...
I have DA folders for a reason. Not every single thing I draw is structured the same way. That'd be... repetitive.

Meowthkip said:
That drawing made me think "This looks like some boring-ass high school bullshit."

You're not as deep as you think you are.
Click to expand...
I recommend taking more time. unless you simply aren't interested, go do somethin' else. :l
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Cunning Condor said:
No, I'm structuring it the way it is with intention. Art is more than simply looking pretty.
Click to expand...
Art: the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
 
TM Ambrose said:
Here's the problem: To the general audience a lot of it looks sexualized.
Click to expand...
I have bleak views on humanity too, but I highly doubt a drawing of a girl will automatically be seen by the general public as "sexualized".

TM Ambrose said:
Art: the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
Click to expand...
That's one of countless ways to define "art", yes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Meowthkip said:
You come off as hella pretentious. Looking down your nose at smut artists, lumping it all together regardless of skill, a general disdain for pornography and those who enjoy it in general...

It just comes off as dickish.
Click to expand...
I'll have to agree with you and even though the only formal education of art I did was during High School, even I understand many of the basic premises of art that all artists should know that Condor is inconsiderate of.

While I can understand what emotion a smutty picture is trying to make me feel (either aroused and/or terrified) I can still appreciate the time and care they've done to draw, colour and edit the image. Sex and nudity in art isn't always lewd: artists of like Beksinski, Goya (even in his later insane years), H. R. Giger and even Picasso drew naughty bits. These artists aren't inheriting the 'terrible' reputation that lewd artists drew that Condor says they should; by the way all of them were given commissions for several of their works.
 
The Cunning Condor said:
That particular character (none of them are named. This is intentional) is given that personality. I plan to add in more varied characters as they go along. Dun worreh.
Click to expand...
I'm not, but I still gotta ask, is that done because you wanted that personality for that particular character, or is it because you think women are ditzy/promiscuous/superficial? See, I'll take your word for whatever you say, but with four strips essentially depicting unambiguously negative behavior from the only female character, it sorta makes you look like one of those loveshy shmucks we see so much of around here. Maybe you're not, but that's definitely how it looks.
 
The Cunning Condor said:
I recommend taking more time. unless you simply aren't interested, go do somethin' else. :l
Click to expand...

"Recommend taking more time" to what, exactly? I can tell at a glance that there's nothing there that grabs my attention. It's a doodle you're trying to pass off as intellectual.

I've seen art of dudes sucking each others' dicks that has more skill and love put into it than your... whatever that was. Better knowledge of lighting, perspective, anatomy, the whole nine yards, and it's dirty as hell.

I'd say that erotic artwork is of higher merit than your Naked People strips.
 
Kittentits said:
Which looks like chicken scratch I'd find in the 7th grade notebook. I fail to see how any of this is done intentionally. So inform me. Why does it look the way it does?
Click to expand...
There are a number of reasons. I'd hate to ruin it, tho. :/

TM Ambrose said:
A girl bending over asking to be disciplined, and blushing isn't sexualized? Are you sure about the autism thing?
Click to expand...
It's satire. I'm not embracing the behavior, I'm pulling a simple joke out of it.
Globe said:
I'm not, but I still gotta ask, is that done because you wanted that personality for that particular character, or is it because you think women are ditzy/promiscuous/superficial? See, I'll take your word for whatever you say, but with four strips essentially depicting unambiguously negative behavior from the only female character, it sorta makes you look like one of those loveshy shmucks we see so much of around here. Maybe you're not, but that's definitely how it looks.
Click to expand...
She won't be the only female character. She's just the only one so far.

TM Ambrose said:
So you're wrong. You said art isn't "just to look pretty", but in some definitions you admit that it is. Please don't be intellectually dishonest, because we will call you on it.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I didn't fully read your definition then (I'm having to answer like 5 posts a minute here). Basically put, art can be an infinite amount of things. Not just visual. (I may just be doing what I can to spare my injured wrist from further typing)

Meowthkip said:
"Recommend taking more time" to what, exactly? I can tell at a glance that there's nothing there that grabs my attention. It's a doodle you're trying to pass off as intellectual.

I've seen art of dudes sucking each others' dicks that has more skill and love put into it than your... whatever that was. Better knowledge of lighting, perspective, anatomy, the whole nine yards, and it's dirty as hell.

I'd say that erotic artwork is of higher merit than your Naked People strips.
Click to expand...
If the drawing doesn't grab your attention... okay. :l

Genesis is in fact more of a doodle than a drawing compared to some other stuff (didn't stop it from earning me a perfect score in the class tho (it was imagery accompanying a paper I wrote on my views on art and it's place in the world))

A smut drawing can look like Davinci himself made it, doesn't matter.
You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig.
I personally prefer substance over glitter.

Erotic artwork (the pornographic kind) is pretty much devoid of any ambition and creativity). With Naked People, I'm just havin' a little giggle. I never claimed they were "revolutionary".

And I'm honestly surprised at how much buzz they're stirring up.
 
The Cunning Condor said:
I can understand how I can come off as pretentious. Hence why I encourage people to ask me about it before jumping into attack mode. I don't make these decisions to look superior. I make these decisions because that's just hoe I personally prefer to work.

Art is very broad. It'd take a while to explain what art as a whole is. I'm trying to answer everyone. But you get the idea. Smut is brainless, unimaginative depictions of people/things meant only to appeal to the labido. It's simple to make as opposed to other art forms.
Click to expand...
I apologize in advance if you've come around in more recent posts as I really wish to get this out. So from one artist to another, your opinions on art are perverse. Art is about expression, and is secondly about communication. Much of art is a conversation, whether between the one making and the one experiencing, or between the artist and his influences/forerunners. Porn isn't brainless, it has a purpose, just like a short story or a painting of the Virgin Mary. It's purpose is to arouse, nothing more, nothing less. There is craft to it, and believe it or not, acting is involved. Know how hard it is to fake an orgasm? How hard it is to stay hard for so many hours? Lastly, as someone trying to publish a novel, grow up. Not having a venue or people willing to pay for your work does not entitle you to call others who have them hookers. Money pays the bills, and art is a skill like any other. As far as your art goes, I don't like it too much, although that Genesis pic someone a page ago shared in order to berate you was pretty neat to me, but I don't think it is bad at all, certainly not bad enough to be featured here. I like you, and no one here should attack you for no reason, and I'm happy to see you aren't a crazy person who flies off the handle at the first sight of negativity. If I were in charge, I would offer to get rid of this thread. Welcome to the farms.
 
Loke said:
I apologize in advance if you've come around in more recent posts as I really wish to get this out. So from one artist to another, your opinions on art are perverse. Art is about expression, and is secondly about communication. Much of art is a conversation, whether between the one making and the one experiencing, or between the artist and his influences/forerunners. Porn isn't brainless, it has a purpose, just like a short story or a painting of the Virgin Mary. It's purpose is to arouse, nothing more, nothing less. There is craft to it, and believe it or not, acting is involved. Know how hard it is to fake an orgasm? How hard it is to stay hard for so many hours? Lastly, as someone trying to publish a novel, grow up. Not having a venue or people willing to pay for your work does not entitle you to call others who have them hookers. Money pays the bills, and art is a skill like any other. As far as your art goes, I don't like it too much, although that Genesis pic someone a page ago shared in order to berate you was pretty neat to me, but I don't think it is bad at all, certainly not bad enough to be featured here. I like you, and no one here should attack you for no reason, and I'm happy to see you aren't a crazy person who flies off the handle at the first sight of negativity. If I were in charge, I would offer to get rid of this thread. Welcome to the farms.
Click to expand...

Porn does have a purpose, but it's a bland and uninspired purpose.

I'm aware of money's necessity in today's society. I just have the personal preference of keeping my art separated from that (for the time being)

MerriedManJr said:
Fascinating. How do "you" "define" "pretentious?"
Click to expand...
The same way most people would. I dunno, I ain't Merriam-Webster. :l
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the good stuff is whats in your folder titled 'Art for the Mind' , then I'm not sure what to say. It looks like what an angsty 15 year old would doodle in their schoolbooks. Hamfisted metaphors mixed in with vague shit that gives you the leeway to say to people "think more about it, you just don't get it!". I'm not surprised you don't value technical skill very much when your best art looks this amateur.

What substance is in this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom