You’re right. It seems to be a link.
What is this a Magritte appreciation thread?
Yes
There. Are. FOUR. PIPES!
Are you at the dentist?
Picture this: The Magritte painting depicted here with the apple replaced with a poop emoji, and the whole painting with the caption Mashitte.
Now that I’ve typed this out, I’m not sure I like the idea, but it would still be art.
Ooh, this Mashitte, this Mashitte
This comic makes me sad. Magritte is great, but I don’t know where, “The Son of Man” is located. Every time I search the only thing I find is “Private Collection”.
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I THINK that might mean that it’s located in a private collection.
Inconceivable!
Well it’s not in my private collection, so now you have one less place to look.
Wait, the
picturepainting of a guy with apple in face really exists?Here, print it out. Originals are only for making money anyway.
I highly encourage you to seek out the original paintings and other artistic mediums in museums when you have a chance. It’s not about prestige, authenticity, or clout. It’s about gazing upon relics that have somehow survived the test of time and gleaming a bit of the creator’s intentions and skill. It’s a human connection that can stretch the breadth of millennia.
Also I used to fix printers so now I have undying hatred of them. I buy quite a few art books though.
Edit: One thing photos, digital image files, and other means of reproduction of most paintings never seem to get right is the texture. Remember a painting is not flat, it’s still a 3rd dimensional object. Painting techniques can layer paints giving them texture, it’s a visual quality that is hard to appreciate when not in person.
That’s a painting not a picture, your semantics have failed you
My counter argument: The Picture of Dorian Gray
It seems the word picture at the very least used to be used for paintings as well, so it’s more that it’s just an uncommon usage. Maybe the guy is a time traveler.
The whole thing is drawn, how can you tell it’s not a picture?
Because it’s a representation of an actual painting, but if we’re going to be overly semantic then I give up. You win
It’s pixels. I’m holding my phone
It’s light traveling from your phone to your eyeballs.
Then it’s neuronal signals to your brain.
OMG it’s abstraction all the way down, isn’t it!? :-P
Those neurons are cells and they need the mitochondria which uses protein to make energy… so everything is just energy in some form or other
And energy in turn derives from the sub-atomic level, which itself sits on top of the quantum, although some people say that it is all oscillations of n-branes… therefore do any words ever have any meaning, really, ever?:-P
Are mirrors real
It happened! Someone said someone else won on the Internet.
Yeah but you lost…
The game
You. Motherfucker.
I’m not sure I like the picture you’re trying to paint with this comment.
Ah trickster rules. We’re in fey territory.
Great, this finally explains why there’s a difference between “a” and “the”.
The question is incorrect. He should’ve asked “can I take the picture”. And would’ve obviously received a no.
I don’t go to parties.
He could mean “one of the pictures” and then the phrasing would be correct.
I don’t see any other pictures in picture. Although, given the context of an art gallery, this would probably make sense.
There could be multiple pictures. And he chooses to take this one.
Even if there is only one picture, it is still a picture, so the question is still grammatically correct. It’s just deliberately ambiguous. I am taking this stand.
Knocks over a statue and walks away with the stand
Removed by mod
Or maybe he has…
Sinner man, where you gonna run to?
