30556
Post by: Nakatan
Hello, people. Today i want to present the scene, that somebody may find rather shocking and even revolting. It depicts IG soldiers, that going to rape eldar female. And i want to make it clear - i`m not a psycho, pervert or something, and i personaly don`t think that rape is a good thing to be done. As, say, Quentin Tarantino doesn`t think that slice people with katana, killing pregnant woman or burning people alive are a good deeds. But he`s telling a story. And so do i. And, really, if one toy soldier can decapitate, slice to pieces, eviscerate, burn with flamer, rip guts etc brutally kill other toy soldier, and you like this game anyway, don`t blame me for making this diorama!
WARNING! SHOCKING CONTENT! 18+ Absolutely NO minors and hypocrites!
http://www.coolminiornot.com/266249
30024
Post by: A Black Ram
I posted this earlier today!
This is such fantastic work. The faces, the atmosphere. Everything about it. 
30540
Post by: IZ TOM
Exellent, minus the rape.
7899
Post by: The Dreadnote
Subject matter notwithstanding, it's an extremely well constructed and painted piece. Well done.
666
Post by: Necros
Really awesome paint job, but the scene itself? not for me
26765
Post by: Bangbangboom
Nice paint job but personally I don't believe the composition. I would have thought that either the guys would be surrounding her, blocking off any exit or she would be backing off away from the group not toward them. Your victim appears to have backed herself into a corner when there is a clear route of escape. But then I have never witnessed a rape so how am I supposed to know how people reacted.
Personally I don't find the scene overly shocking, I have seen movies with far more graphic scenes.
30556
Post by: Nakatan
Bangbangboom wrote:
Personally I don't find the scene overly shocking, I have seen movies with far more graphic scenes.
The composition is done so to make a good photos afterwads, so it has some flaws. I posted the warning, because some people saying that diorama is shocking and revolting.
29052
Post by: Xenon
Nice work! Excellent paintjob! Bangbangboom wrote:Your victim appears to have backed herself into a corner when there is a clear route of escape.
Clear route of escape while there are 5 soldiers around her and one guy is pointing gun at her head? And maybe she can be injured or something so she really couldn't be able to escape or something..
5531
Post by: Leigen_Zero
Incredibly well made, incredibly well painted, theme is very edgy but I think it's been rather nicely executed.
Besides, what we are all forgetting here is the average levels of training of the average guardsman and an eldar guardian, lets face it one eldar could probably take on 4 humans and win...
15749
Post by: Animachina
And this is where things go from Hobby to Art. If a piece provokes this much passion and conflict in the viewer it meets the requirements that I currently associate with real artistic expression.
Rape is a reality in war, the fact that this depicts an alien actually makes it easier for people to accept, how horrifying is that? Imagine replacing the Eldar with an imperial citizen or a female ganger...what would be your reaction?
Well done!
26765
Post by: Bangbangboom
Nakatan wrote:The composition is done so to make a good photos afterwads, so it has some flaws. I posted the warning, because some people saying that diorama is shocking and revolting.
Fair enough, I don't know if you tried it but I believe if the guy unzipping was standing over her so we saw his back he would have looked more dominating and she would have looked more fearful. But then I suppose you wouldn't be able to see what he was doing and the "story" set in the scene would have been lost. Still the scene is suitable grimdark, war isn't all blood and bullet wounds after all.
I wouldn't worry about people complaining about the content, other mediums have far more graphic images, some just like to complain. The warning probably was necessary though.
Xenon wrote:Bangbangboom wrote:Your victim appears to have backed herself into a corner when there is a clear route of escape.
Clear route of escape while there are 5 soldiers around her and one guy is pointing gun at her head? And maybe she can be injured or something so she really couldn't be able to escape or something.
I never said a successful route of escape 
22687
Post by: MajorTom11
Animachina wrote:And this is where things go from Hobby to Art. If a piece provokes this much passion and conflict in the viewer it meets the requirements that I currently associate with real artistic expression.
+1, it is a surprisingly visceral portrayal of a disgusting act, which evokes a strong reaction. That's what it is meant to do. The subject matter is meant to be disturbing, and as one can admire the piece as both art in terms of the magnificent painting and modelling job, and then have something to think about and react to emotionally, makes this an official art piece in my book.
I don't understand why people react as if this piece is endorsing the behavior depicted in it. I view it as a criticism. It is clear who the bad guys are, and it is also clear that this scenario has probably played out thousands upon thousands of times in real life. This happens. Don't be so quick to judge and look away, when clearly this piece is supposed to make you angry, and make you think about reality and how you see war and soldiers too.
Very memorable.
34386
Post by: flanman
You have wonderful spelling and grammar.
7899
Post by: The Dreadnote
Are you talking about the Russian guy, or someone else?
More to the point, why are you talking about spelling/grammar and not the goddamn model he posted?
12313
Post by: Ouze
The Dreadnote wrote:Are you talking about the Russian guy, or someone else?
More to the point, why are you talking about spelling/grammar and not the goddamn model he posted?
Oh snap!
963
Post by: Mannahnin
The painting and modeling is fantastic, but I agree that the composition is flawed, and lets the piece down.
My biggest issue is that the missing armor on her torso (while her helmet, gloves, etc. are all intact) seems unrealistic, and purely present to reveal the chest.
Even with the guardsman having removed the chest plate, any soldier wears some kind of undergarment, singlet, or something beneath.
It appears that the artist didn't have enough confidence that the face, the contours of the body, or the scene made it obvious that she's female. Some rips/holes in the armor, and possibly an injury, would be realistic and underscore her vulnerability without the clumsiness of just showing her breasts in this way.
A flaw like this actually sticks out more in a work so impressive.
23828
Post by: eledamris
Wow... that's the edgiest thing I've ever seen a modeller do, especially a Warhammer modeller. And I do a lot of Slaanesh stuff! I'm impressed with the paintjob. The only thing I can possibly criticize here is that Imperial Guardsmen are indoctrinated to utterly despise the alien, and this would probably be more disgusting than bestiality to them. I hope these guys' Commisar doesn't find out.
22687
Post by: MajorTom11
Mannahnin wrote:The painting and modeling is fantastic, but I agree that the composition is flawed, and lets the piece down.
My biggest issue is that the missing armor on her torso (while her helmet, gloves, etc. are all intact) seems unrealistic, and purely present to reveal the chest.
Even with the guardsman having removed the chest plate, any soldier wears some kind of undergarment, singlet, or something beneath.
It appears that the artist didn't have enough confidence that the face, the contours of the body, or the scene made it obvious that she's female. Some rips/holes in the armor, and possibly an injury, would be realistic and underscore her vulnerability without the clumsiness of just showing her breasts in this way.
A flaw like this actually sticks out more in a work so impressive.
Very good crit Mannahnin! I agree on nearly every point, and would add that the fact that the top of her torso armor on her is ripped and cracked, while the breastplate is mint, struck me as well. As you said though, the overall quality of technique and painting is so good thing like that stick out. I am going to go have a look at his other work now, since I am wondering what else he has done, and would like to enjoy a less controversial piece too lol
37115
Post by: McFlufferson
That's pretty awesome.
Does he have to roll to wound?
If he fails, does he have to take morale in embarrassment?
37197
Post by: Mr.Awesome1
Dude that is seriously sick!!!!! 
Nice paint job thought 
20867
Post by: Just Dave
Mannahnin wrote:The painting and modeling is fantastic, but I agree that the composition is flawed, and lets the piece down.
My biggest issue is that the missing armor on her torso (while her helmet, gloves, etc. are all intact) seems unrealistic, and purely present to reveal the chest.
Even with the guardsman having removed the chest plate, any soldier wears some kind of undergarment, singlet, or something beneath.
It appears that the artist didn't have enough confidence that the face, the contours of the body, or the scene made it obvious that she's female. Some rips/holes in the armor, and possibly an injury, would be realistic and underscore her vulnerability without the clumsiness of just showing her breasts in this way.
A flaw like this actually sticks out more in a work so impressive.
This was basically my thought exactly. Just written better.
735
Post by: JOHIRA
Mannahnin wrote:The painting and modeling is fantastic, but I agree that the composition is flawed, and lets the piece down.
My biggest issue is that the missing armor on her torso (while her helmet, gloves, etc. are all intact) seems unrealistic, and purely present to reveal the chest.
Even with the guardsman having removed the chest plate, any soldier wears some kind of undergarment, singlet, or something beneath.
It appears that the artist didn't have enough confidence that the face, the contours of the body, or the scene made it obvious that she's female. Some rips/holes in the armor, and possibly an injury, would be realistic and underscore her vulnerability without the clumsiness of just showing her breasts in this way.
A flaw like this actually sticks out more in a work so impressive.
Agreed. And I also felt the way the guardsman was holding the chestplate was odd. It doesn't look to me like he's holding an object that has weight, he looks like he has had a plastic object glued into his hands.
And I also agree that it is because the rest of this model is so good that I noticed that. It's certainly well above anything I can do.
The faces are superb. The guardsman holding the lasgun looks like he actually feels the part. Same with the guy undoing his pants. I'm reading a bit of ambiguity into the face of the guardsman with the boltgun, like maybe he regrets what's going on but doesn't want to take a stand against his squad for an alien. Even if that wasn't what you were intending, the fact that I am reading that much story into it shows how well you've done your job. The tattoos are also fantastic. I don't think I've ever seen tattoos that actually look like dye in the skin, as opposed to paint sitting on the skin. I love the weathering on the wrecked wave serpent. And it's also quite cool how all the colors in the scene are muted except for the Eldar herself. The effect is a bit like a spotlight to draw us back to her and make sure we don't forget about her. There are things that can be improved, but they are small details in a sea of awesome.
I wish we didn't live in a world where you felt the need to defend yourself from being called a psycho, but I understand the feeling. This is art, and I would say this hilights one of my biggest complaints about our hobby. There are thousands of finger-quotes "adult" miniatures of naked big-titted women with big weapons, but they generally pass without comment and feel very juvenile to me. You have tried to make something that actually moves people with complex emotions, and because of that you appear to feel like you need a disclaimer. I thank you for making your diorama. You've raised the bar on what this hobby can be.
34191
Post by: fasterthanlight
Hmmm.
Very original and well made. Great paint job.
I agree with the others about some of the unrealistic elements but whislt they are true, they are inconsquetial.
Now, the content... Part of me applauds you for trying this out, part of me is dissapointed. I'm not shocked in anyway, i've seen far worse. I just don't think that this is in the spirit of the 40k universe. I'm not saying it wouldn't go on... just that 40k wasn't made to support and deal with these issues, therfore it falls down.
I also can't help but feel there is an edge of fantasy about it. Which is a bit messed up.
FTL
23828
Post by: eledamris
Well said, Johira. This actually might be the most interesting thing I've ever seen a miniatures modeller do. Art isn't just about being pretty, it's about conjuring up strong emotions at times, and I think that this can almost unanimously be referred to as art.
963
Post by: Mannahnin
JOHIRA wrote:I wish we didn't live in a world where you felt the need to defend yourself from being called a psycho, but I understand the feeling. This is art, and I would say this hilights one of my biggest complaints about our hobby. There are thousands of finger-quotes "adult" miniatures of naked big-titted women with big weapons, but they generally pass without comment and feel very juvenile to me. You have tried to make something that actually moves people with complex emotions, and because of that you appear to feel like you need a disclaimer.
Well, in fairness, the usual audience for 40k stuff involves kids. And this is an effort at mature art, which is not kid-appropriate.
I agree that this is on a higher level than the run-of-the-mill scantily or un-clad fantasy women you see here and there. That stuff is obviously juvenile, but is relatively innocent in its adolescence.
Part of my criticism of this piece, though, is that the artist chose to show the breasts; which means he's got to be extremely careful and realistic in his presentation to avoid blurring the line between art and juvenile fantasy involving elf boobs. And sadly, I think he's failed a bit there.
30556
Post by: Nakatan
Thanks tor your criticism and praises, certainly there are some flaws, obivous more or less. And yes, i like elf chicks and, well, elf boobs). But that eldar female here was a first `serious` sculpting experience, not that years-boobs fantasy).
But, mos importantly, heh, i could not even imagine such reaction for this diorama. On one of our russian forums it gathered 16 pages of aggressive hypocritical flood). Thanks to all of you for react the way you do.
15884
Post by: ghosty
It's the faces that does it for me. Each one, from the stern resolute eldar, who seems to be reaching for the knife, to the uncomfortable commander, whose taking a Laissez faire attitude to the entire incident. The character in the facial expressions is so damn good!
25746
Post by: wizard12
I think it is a very good diorama with a powerful narrative, excellent painting and modeling (apart from a slightly strange pose on the officer but I'll put is down to the camera angle)
All other ideas and thoughts of mine on this piece can be found in the other thread of this. I apologize if some of my comments offend or come off as attack to others, they are not intended to hurt but to make a strong point.
221
Post by: Frazzled
I think the subject matter is puerile and really detracts from the awesomeness of the painting and the conversions. It would have been better served had they just found a survivor and their similar reactions to it.
I really like the different camo schemes on the guardsmen.
19366
Post by: Grimm
Frazzled wrote:I think the subject matter is puerile and really detracts from the awesomeness of the painting and the conversions. It would have been better served had they just found a survivor and their similar reactions to it.
I really like the different camo schemes on the guardsmen.
I agree with you entirely. If they had been surrounding the Eldar ready to kill her, it would be far more interesting and acceptable in my mind. The P+M is amazing though, so I hope to see some more appropriate pieces in the future.
I also had a thought. I believe it's the fact that it's a human doing the dodgy act that offends us. Imagine a similar piece but replace the Guardsmen with Dark Eldar. In my mind, it would seem far more acceptable. Maybe because they're not human.
I would also like to add that I think this is also against fluff. I know it happens in real life, but as mentioned above, Xenos disgust humans, and I don't believe any self-respecting Emperor-Worshipper would go that far with an alien.
27553
Post by: Brother Heinrich
to all those deploring the content of the diorama I say shame on you, how can you look at this and criticize the artist and at the same time applaud another who creates an incredibly visceral diorama of Khorne Bezerkers ripping guardsmen to bloody tatters. War is war ladies and gents, and in the 41st millennium it only gets worse, kudos to the artist for portraying a sensitive issue in an amazing way.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Brother Heinrich wrote:to all those deploring the content of the diorama I say shame on you, how can you look at this and criticize the artist and at the same time applaud another who creates an incredibly visceral diorama of Khorne Bezerkers ripping guardsmen to bloody tatters. War is war ladies and gents, and in the 41st millennium it only gets worse, kudos to the artist for portraying a sensitive issue in an amazing way.
1. One is separate (I for one haven't even looked at the other).
2. Get over yourself. This is not war. This is 40K. You have killer fungi fighting with pointy sticks. Its a game, nothing more.
7899
Post by: The Dreadnote
Hypothetically, Fraz, how would you feel about the diorama were it not set in 40K?
221
Post by: Frazzled
The Dreadnote wrote:Hypothetically, Fraz, how would you feel about the diorama were it not set in 40K?
I'd say whats with the space ship?
7899
Post by: The Dreadnote
Touché.
1021
Post by: AesSedai
I think this is a worthwhile and praiseworthy achievement. It has a strong narrative carried though on the strength of the artist's skills. It does what every diorama should hope to do: pull the viewer into the scene.
I'm far more shocked by the opinions expressed in this and the other thread than by what the scene may be suggesting.
I was in a shop the other day, looking at a diorama of 5 WW2 soldiers leaning against a tank and smoking. Before long, 10 minutes had passed. I really enjoy being pulled into another place vis a vis someone's imagination--be it a tabletop game, a film, a book, music, a dish, or a diorama.
Thanks go out to the artist.
27553
Post by: Brother Heinrich
Frazzled wrote:
2. Get over yourself. This is not war. This is 40K. You have killer fungi fighting with pointy sticks. Its a game, nothing more.
then why get so ruffled over a pair of plastic alien toy knockers?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Brother Heinrich wrote:Frazzled wrote:
2. Get over yourself. This is not war. This is 40K. You have killer fungi fighting with pointy sticks. Its a game, nothing more.
then why get so ruffled over a pair of plastic alien toy knockers?
Evidently because you forget what you type:
to all those deploring the content of the diorama I say shame on you
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Bloody, horrific violence is fine but anything involving sexuality is naughty.
I'll never understand people.
It also seems to me that the one guy ripping off her breastplate isn't really all that out of place considering what they are ostensibly about to do to her...
27553
Post by: Brother Heinrich
Frazzled wrote:Brother Heinrich wrote:Frazzled wrote:
2. Get over yourself. This is not war. This is 40K. You have killer fungi fighting with pointy sticks. Its a game, nothing more.
then why get so ruffled over a pair of plastic alien toy knockers?
Evidently because you forget what you type:
to all those deploring the content of the diorama I say shame on you
perhaps I should've said, 'I don't understand why people have a negative view on the subject matter' instead of laying shame upon your head, I just don't understand attacking the artist for his choice in subject matter. Yes rape is a terrible act, and should be rightly spoken out against, the artist on the other hand should be applauded for touching on a very real and distressing part of the fictional universe we all so enjoy. If we didn't give a flying fart about the background or reailty behind our little toy men, then why not simply abolish the "background" and "General Discussion" sections and just leave it to tactics, rules and lists?
10207
Post by: namegoeshere
Frazzled wrote:Brother Heinrich wrote:to all those deploring the content of the diorama I say shame on you, how can you look at this and criticize the artist and at the same time applaud another who creates an incredibly visceral diorama of Khorne Bezerkers ripping guardsmen to bloody tatters. War is war ladies and gents, and in the 41st millennium it only gets worse, kudos to the artist for portraying a sensitive issue in an amazing way.
1. One is separate (I for one haven't even looked at the other).
2. Get over yourself. This is not war. This is 40K. You have killer fungi fighting with pointy sticks. Its a game, nothing more.
Get over yourself, people can paint whatever they like, if you don't like it don't look.
Personally I liked it, moving grimdark more toward normal tropes.
221
Post by: Frazzled
namegoeshere wrote:Frazzled wrote:Brother Heinrich wrote:to all those deploring the content of the diorama I say shame on you, how can you look at this and criticize the artist and at the same time applaud another who creates an incredibly visceral diorama of Khorne Bezerkers ripping guardsmen to bloody tatters. War is war ladies and gents, and in the 41st millennium it only gets worse, kudos to the artist for portraying a sensitive issue in an amazing way.
1. One is separate (I for one haven't even looked at the other).
2. Get over yourself. This is not war. This is 40K. You have killer fungi fighting with pointy sticks. Its a game, nothing more.
Get over yourself, people can paint whatever they like, if you don't like it don't look.
If you don't want comments then don't post it on the showcase forum. 
16387
Post by: Manchu
Monster Rain wrote:Bloody, horrific violence is fine but anything involving sexuality is naughty.
I'll never understand people.
It also seems to me that the one guy ripping off her breastplate isn't really all that out of place considering what they are ostensibly about to do to her...
Ah, we agree yet again. This genre is full of bad, bad things--things far worse than rape. Genocide is a fundamental plank in the platform of 40k background, for example--and it is always presented in a tongue-in-cheek way. To say that this piece goes too far, or not far enough, in its realism is by turns stodgy and silly. It is an amazing piece and, if it has flaws, I don't think they've yet been discussed in this thread. I certainly haven't detected any.
28281
Post by: Field Marshal Wiley
She is clearly gonna grab that knife throw it in ole mohawks face then kick the rest of there ass's in a topless ninja like fashion just wait till she gets a hold of that lasgun or bolter you dumb ass guardsmen.
27553
Post by: Brother Heinrich
Field Marshal Wiley wrote:She is clearly gonna grab that knife throw it in ole mohawks face then kick the rest of there ass's in a topless ninja like fashion just wait till she gets a hold of that lasgun or bolter you dumb ass guardsmen.
agreed lol, that definitaley not a creature you want let your guard down around, think Kami from streetfighter lol
33868
Post by: winnertakesall
Join the Imperial Guard! Your Emperor needs YOU!
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Monster Rain wrote:Bloody, horrific violence is fine but anything involving sexuality is naughty.
I don't think rape and sex amount to the same thing at all, disliking rape isn't about a dislike of sexuality in general, it's dislike of a horrible topic. Sexuality as a concept should be about expressing feelings, desires and confidence, the act of rape is about power, control and humiliation. I don't take issue with most sexualised miniatures but rape and non-consensual sexual acts I do find a distasteful topic.
Brother Heinrich wrote:Yes rape is a terrible act, and should be rightly spoken out against, the artist on the other hand should be applauded for touching on a very real and distressing part of the fictional universe we all so enjoy. If we didn't give a flying fart about the background or reailty behind our little toy men, then why not simply abolish the "background" and "General Discussion" sections and just leave it to tactics, rules and lists?
I find the message confusing, while on one hand there are people claiming it's supposed to be some clever and artistic commentary on the real horrors of war, but it's such an overtly sexualised piece that we are invited to oggle the about to be victim which makes the message of the whole piece adolescent and trivialised.
16387
Post by: Manchu
Howard A Treesong wrote: I don't take issue with most sexualised miniatures but rape and non-consensual sexual acts I do find a distasteful topic.
How about hate-motivated murder?
27553
Post by: Brother Heinrich
Howard A Treesong wrote:
I find the message confusing, while on one hand there are people claiming it's supposed to be some clever and artistic commentary on the real horrors of war, but it's such an overtly sexualised piece that we are invited to oggle the about to be victim which makes the message of the whole piece adolescent and trivialised.
a valid point sir, the same portrayal could've been achieved with tattered and torn clothes just as well, however I think the artist may have been going for shock value, in which case they certainly succeeded.
22687
Post by: MajorTom11
Manchu wrote:Howard A Treesong wrote: I don't take issue with most sexualised miniatures but rape and non-consensual sexual acts I do find a distasteful topic.
How about hate-motivated murder?
That's perfectly alright. It looks nice next to my intestines being dragged out and eaten by a daemon piece lol
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Manchu wrote:Howard A Treesong wrote: I don't take issue with most sexualised miniatures but rape and non-consensual sexual acts I do find a distasteful topic.
How about hate-motivated murder?
I spoke of this on the similar thread in the discussions area. Mainly, rape is something that is emotionally very moving in a way that simple killing is not, dependent on the type of death though. People die all the time in films, but rape scenes are frequently the most shocking. I don't think there's any point in saying that murder is worse than rape, so because we tolerate people dying in fiction rape is clearly fair game. For instance, loads of computer games feature people dying, but running people over in a car in GTA is nothing like raping women in a controversial game like Rapelay. At a guess, subjects like rape affects a different part of the brain, whereas you can dissociate yourself from the non-reality of GTA and laugh at it, the content of something like Rapelay merely leaves one feeling sick.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
So genocide is fine for subject material, but rape isnt?
Also, rape is a sexual act Howard. It's not consensual, but you can't act like it doesn't involve sexuality. It's not even necessarily violent.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Monster Rain wrote:So genocide is fine for subject material, but rape isnt?
Also, rape is a sexual act Howard. It's not consensual, but you can't act like it doesn't involve sexuality. It's not even necessarily violent.
I'm sorry, when was the last time there was a diorama on genocide again?
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Does there need to be a diorama about it? It's an overarching theme throughout all of 40k. But forget about genocide, then. What about the art that depict graphic violence? Why is that less of a problem?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Monster Rain wrote:Does there need to be a diorama about it? It's an overarching theme throughout all of 40k. But forget about genocide, then. What about the art that depict graphic violence? Why is that less of a problem?
graphic violence against killer fungi...
9407
Post by: Lint
I like it. But then again, I am an adult and have a right to appreciate whatever art I see fit.
Definitely not for kiddies, but I find myself asking why it's ok to glorify other examples of extreme violence and murder, but a scene like this causes such mixed reations?
Yes I get that rape is touchy, and not the same as a SM ripping an ork to shreds, but why?
As for the diorama itself, and the subject of xenophobic humans raping an eldar: I don't find it far-fetched at all. Rape is not about pleaseure gained form the act of sex, it's the act of dominance which drives the rapist. And what better way to establish dominance over someone you hate than to violate them in the most personal way possible. It's like prison rape, to qoute Richard Pryor "they don't do because they're gay, they do it to see the look on your face."
These soldiers could easily be a convict unit, the Imperium uses alot of those iirc.
29151
Post by: HF Izanagi
I definitely agree with the sentiment that it is a touchy subject, and the artist got what he/she wanted by evoking a sense of revulsion in all of us. It's a fantastic piece, and one I would definitely associate more with art than the lesser-thought-of (HERESY!!!  ) "hobby painting".
I personally wouldn't have made it 1) because my models suck hard compared to that jewel 2) I wouldn't feel right having that as an art piece in my home, and 3) the subject matter puts a bad taste in my mouth... as the artist intended.
For small nitpicks, yes, the breastplate is pristine while the rest of her armor is muddied and soiled, and while I'm no pro on Eldar under-armor or clothing, it does seem a bit odd that there's nothing under. If there were shredded remnants of the underlay there, it'd be a bit more convincing.
But other than that, the painting, the modelling, the whole scene really pulls together and brings up dark feelings. Kudos to the artist.
... Sidenote: That guy undoing his belt is about to get his junk chopped in half...
19146
Post by: brother_zach
Interesting ideas about tattered clothing instead of exposed breasts. Definately the scariest thing about the piece is how it makes you think. It's just about like the scene from "Platoon".
In terms of genocide in the universe of our hobbies- your right, it's not out there in black and white. BUT is is implied and talked about in much (if not most) of the supplements in 40k, beit a piece of fluff in a codex or a chapter in a Black Library novel.
This piece is definately not a work I would show my friends who don't do 40k, but to fellow fans I find it interesting to see where the hobby should drawl it's lines.
34644
Post by: Mr Nobody
Where's a Comissar when you need them.
19146
Post by: brother_zach
Mr Nobody wrote:Where's a Comissar when you need them.
He's with the blob squad of 50 or so guardsmen, probaly locked in a meat grinding assult.
9407
Post by: Lint
To be fair, the woman is an Eldar. Psychic anyone? She was probably asking for it. I mean look at how she was dressed.
34285
Post by: Matrim
Who do Eldar have boobs anyway?
32190
Post by: asimo77
All that I can think of is someone sepnding tons of hours dedicated to making a scene of toy soldiers raping each other....
This is pretty bad
16387
Post by: Manchu
asimo77 wrote:All that I can think of is someone sepnding tons of hours dedicated to making a scene of toy soldiers raping each other....
This is pretty bad
I know. What will they do next? Invent whole ranges of toy soldiers ideologically committed to oppression, genocide, murder, torture, and mayhem more generally? Can you imagine if there were people who had careers entirely based on this? Or sepnt vast sums of money collecting this stuff? Or spent hours posting on a fourm about it? Won't someone please think of the children???
35973
Post by: Gibbsey
Manchu wrote:asimo77 wrote:All that I can think of is someone sepnding tons of hours dedicated to making a scene of toy soldiers raping each other....
This is pretty bad
I know. What will they do next? Invent whole ranges of toy soldiers ideologically committed to oppression, genocide, murder, torture, and mayhem more generally? Can you imagine if there were people who had careers entirely based on this? Or sepnt vast sums of money collecting this stuff? Or spent hours posting on a fourm about it?
Won't someone please think of the children???
I dont think we need infanticide aswell....
16387
Post by: Manchu
Well, buster, it happens in the grimdark. When you're exterminating entire planetary populations--or species for that matter--you don't make exceptions of the kids.
22687
Post by: MajorTom11
Lol even the mods are split on this one... I'm with Manchu on this one though, use a chibi-hawk to kill miniature children!
16387
Post by: Manchu
MajorTom11 wrote:use a chibi-hawk to kill miniature children!
But when they all scream "ahhh, chibihawk incommmmmming!" before being crushed, think how many Blood Angels and Dark Angels will get their wings!
32190
Post by: asimo77
I just think it's silly when people go "what a passionate expression of art!" or "a tour de force of raep!" and other nonsense.
This is just some serious fetish fuel. The guy is probably into rape fantasies, elfs, sci-fi, microphilia, and who knows what else.
I don't see anything separating this from all the rule 34 stuff on 4chan and the like.
16387
Post by: Manchu
You like Necrons, right? I guessing you're a total necrophile. Or perhaps it's the idea of flensing off a person's skin that excites you? And, look I've got an Ultramarines avatar: what strange perversions am I trying to express? Pfft.
As much as any miniatures diorama can be art, this one is. This work has more depth of character and story than about 60% of what BL publishes, nevermind the enormous technical skill and creativity that it demonstrates. And it is entirely true to the world of Warhammer 40,000. I'd bet that if GW didn't make so much money off of preteens this kind of thing would be standard fare in terms of official Codex art. I bet this would even be tame, actually.
221
Post by: Frazzled
It can be art but still be BAD art Manchu.
16387
Post by: Manchu
I think it's good art. And like a lot of good art, it's dangerous for the morally underdeveloped. I see that angle. There are people out there immature enough to "read" this piece as an endorsement of actual rape. I don't blame the hobbyist/artist for that deficiency, however.
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
Manchu wrote:I think it's good art. And like a lot of good art, it's dangerous for the morally underdeveloped. I see that angle. There are people out there immature enough to "read" this piece as an endorsement of actual rape. I don't blame the hobbyist/artist for that deficiency, however.
Exactly what manchu said, dont blame the artist, blame the victim!
9407
Post by: Lint
corpsesarefun wrote:
dont blame the artist, blame the victim!
Like I said, she's totally asking for it.
22687
Post by: MajorTom11
Manchu wrote:I think it's good art. And like a lot of good art, it's dangerous for the morally underdeveloped. I see that angle. There are people out there immature enough to "read" this piece as an endorsement of actual rape. I don't blame the hobbyist/artist for that deficiency, however.
Here here, and Frazz, I don't think Manchu is trying to decide for anyone whether they like it or not. He is simply expressing his opinion that clearly a lot more work and though went into the piece than simply popping out boobies. The fact that many people find it thought provoking also nudge it into the definition of art a bit more than craft. There are plenty of fine art pieces that depict similar themes or scenes, and you won't see them quite as much as van gogh due to their subject matter, but it is most definitely out there. As one of the ugliest sides of human nature, it is worth exploring as long as the discussions that result can be conducted with maturity and agreement on the less subjective aspects.
No one is going yay rape, but saying this guy is nothing but a dirty little mini perve who had no reason for doing this piece other than he wanted to stroke out to mini boobs is waaaaaaaaay to strong to be put forward as legitimate criticism. He could easily have gotten a similar scene with massively less amounts of work and character if all he wanted was something dirty for dirty's sake. That that this guy thought up an adult and harsh situation with 5 hard-up soldiers and a beautiful alien when they are in some isolated part of a battlefield is not a stretch, it's a logical assumption (to me).
There is plenty not to like if you find it intensly offensive, and are too uncomfortable to imagine the situation and psychology. (that's not a knock, I genuinely respect people not liking it on a visceral level and not wanting anything to do with it) But, at the same time, if you want to sway people of differing opinion, saying it sucks 'just because' inst going to swing it. Why not just agree to disagree? Automatically Appended Next Post: Lint wrote:corpsesarefun wrote:
dont blame the artist, blame the victim!
Like I said, she's totally asking for it.
And ya, it's this kinda gak response that's not helping. It's not funny dude. It's not something you should laugh at at the best of times, and frankly, in a thread full of people with strong feelings, that kind of comment really derails what could otherwise be an enjoyable if intense debate.
Jokes like that belong on x-box live man. lol
36711
Post by: Depraved
Excellent execution. This diorama is full of emotion, you can see greed, lust, anger, wrath, regret and more upon their faces. Rape is a classic art subject matter and one of many taboo subjects that artists help people to express, remember and visualize.
P. da Cortona, Rape of the Sabines (Capitoline)
Rape of the Daughters of Leucippus 1618
Rape of Oreithyia by Boreas
29151
Post by: HF Izanagi
I think MajorTom puts it in a good way. The subject matter of the piece obviously has people bringing up negative feelings about the piece and unfortunately, for the artist himself/herself. The fact that it took so much time when he could have easily taken sprue material and bent them into suggestive shapes and positions shows that a lot of thought and time was put into moulding a thought/feeling-provoking scene. Essentially, they're standard figurines converted into a facet of our reality (under a guise of fantasy) that brings up such feelings of revulsion. (for both the piece, the subject, and the artist)
Again, while the subject is dark, almost taboo, it isn't a reason to ride on the artist as a pervert and automatically shoot it down as art. It got you feeling sick in your stomach or angry? Art has a way of doing that. Same thing with miniatures when we find that someone has just made the nicest rendition of our favored characters and painted it to a masterpiece level. We say "holy  , that is awesome" and we feel SOMETHING for it, whether that be happiness, jealousy (for not having thought/created it first, and not owning it), or awe. Just because the subject isn't right in your mind, it doesn't mean that it was done distastefully, disrespectfully, or with the singular purpose to get off on it. That's being a bit too harsh in judgement.
Those on the "art" boat probably won't sway the opinions of those on the other side, but I think that's a good thing. It's all in the opinions of the person viewing it.
9407
Post by: Lint
MajorTom11 wrote:And ya, it's this kinda gak response that's not helping. It's not funny dude. It's not something you should laugh at at the best of times, and frankly, in a thread full of people with strong feelings, that kind of comment really derails what could otherwise be an enjoyable if intense debate.
Jokes like that belong on x-box live man. lol
Nothing wrong with injecting humour into the debate... It's like laughing at cartoon characters burning eachother with flamethrowers. Obviously if you saw it happening irl it would not be something to laugh at. Maybe you didn't get the sarcasm in the joke?
284
Post by: Augustus
It's an awesome piece of work! I really liked it composition wise, execution wise and just overall!
There is only 'drama' here if you haven't seen bewbeez before.
Hey it's the internet, if that's your issue, go get your fix and quit decrying the excellent diorama. By comparison to other things on the net, this was tasteful and well executed.
34644
Post by: Mr Nobody
If it was a dark eldar, she would be smiling. I think this scene was an attempt to be extremely grimdark, and maybe went a little too far into the tasteless IMO.
2326
Post by: shasolenzabi
It also reminds me of scenes in movies where things look grim for the female and as they are about to make their move, I can imagine the next scene would be the snap of a bolt pistol as a commissar and a squad of hand picked "cleanliness" troops arrive to stop them from contaminating themselves with such xenos contact. That and the commissar would likely see her as a source of Intelligence on the enemy.
The tableau is implying that a serious situation is about to ensue, but it has not yet done so. A moment frozen in time, one that has obviously elicited some visceral responses, and that is the essence of art, to grab us at the core of our being. I am somewhat disturbed by the subject matter, but I can also appreciate the details, the pain work, the dirt effects etc. I agree, she may have had some undergarment(usually a body glove or something) but the piece is done.
Not only will the veteran squad sully themselves with the black mark of a rape, but that of intimate contact with xenos, They are going against the catechisms regarding aliens. No matter what, the Eldar is not going to enjoy what is left of her life, either due to the implied rape, the Interrogation process, and the fact that the Imperium does not like taking alien prisoners.
284
Post by: Augustus
MajorTom11 wrote:There is plenty not to like if you find it intensly offensive, and are too uncomfortable to imagine the situation and psychology. (that's not a knock, I genuinely respect people not liking it on a visceral level and not wanting anything to do with it) But, at the same time, if you want to sway people of differing opinion, saying it sucks 'just because' inst going to swing it. Why not just agree to disagree?
Well said Major!
Also these are strait off the GW website:
In Chains:
This isn't the first time this theme was visited: Inter alien abuse, but this time it's the other way around, I think the IG Eldar piece is a great reversal/response to this:
Which I don't ever remember people decrying for lurid content. Surely it hasn't entered this discussion yet, and this is from the original manufacturer.
32190
Post by: asimo77
Mr Nobody wrote:If it was a dark eldar, she would be smiling. I think this scene was an attempt to be extremely grimdark, and maybe went a little too far into the tasteless IMO.
Yes this, WH40k is a game I don't need rape in my game. I don't like looking at it or thinking about it; and I'm sure that's a pretty normal thing. Maybe it's just me but I don't find 40k all that serious it's all very silly. Everyone talks about genocide, war, and grimdarkery but all that is taken to such extremes and presented in such a fashion that it's humourous. Like frazzled said genocide committed by fighting fungi men isn't the best way to take the concept of genocide seriously, but as far as rape goes it's pretty hard not to take it seriously.
The grimdarkness isn't the best satire so I'm going to assume it is not an artistic endeavour and more of an entertaining one. In other words it's all to make the world over the top and wacky and give you a reason to field superhumans and space elfs. And this is perfectly fine for a tabletop game, it doesn't need to make any commentary on rape and real world evils, and so far it hasn't (at least not in a meaningful way). Also why is this art but all the other pics on say /tg or whatever isn't?
Also I think I'm going to stop. Can't be talking about serious business on the internet. Must lurk more....regain sanity...
284
Post by: Augustus
asimo77 wrote:..perfectly fine for a tabletop game, it doesn't need to make any commentary on rape and real world evils, and so far it hasn't (at least not in a meaningful way). ...
Uh, do you know what Slanesh is? An entire 1/4 th of the chaos faction dedicated to the very concept?
Daemonettes?
Azdrubael Vect?
Emperor's Children?
Sister Repentia?
It's been a theme in the game for a long time. With these kind of shortsited artisitic morales a whole lot more of the game becomes tasteless. How about these?
It's not just women either:
Trying to depict the diorama in that example as something way beyond the content of the 40 universe is just prudish and wrong.
22749
Post by: Lycaeus Wrex
I think its an excellent piece. The expressions in the faces are note-perfect (observe the sadistic grin of the Guardman holding the lasgun), and it highlights an aspect of war that is too commonly ignored or swept under the rug purely *because* of its sensitive and taboo subject area.
This piece goes far beyond the realm of simply gluing plastic spacemenz together and actually attempts to present a darker, more sinister and more *realistic* interpretation of what could (and has) happened on innumerable battlefields both past, present and presumably future.
I applaud the artist for not only the excellent quality of painting and modelling, but also for daring to broach a subject as controversial as this.
Well done!
L. Wrex
29279
Post by: jackanory
Wow. My first reaction to this piece was one of revulsion and sadness and I think this is what the artist was trying to achieve. Don't you haters think that if he was some sort of rape fetishist he would have actually depicted the rape itself?
Although it's got flaws I think this is a really great depiction of one of the many horrors of war. I find it weird the way people delineate what scenes are appropriate in our hobby in, what seems to me, to be a completely arbitrary fashion. Why is it ok the make social commentaries on war like this in movies, fine art etc but not in miniatures?
As a side note I love the defiant look on her face like she's just waiting for the opportunity to end these guys. I think the guy with the bolter will be spared though, he's clearly feeling the same way I do about the scene.
23115
Post by: OoieGoie
The diorama in question has been posted a few times already with the same theme!!!
Its the idea that "she could be.." that sickens people. She isnt being raped in the picture, nor could be if the theme was continued (although there is a chance). Its telling a story and all the details are there if you're willing to look at the picture longer then 2 sec. There is so much detail people seem to miss. Go on, go look...
Love the diorama. Brilliant. 10\10.
Now go back to your Dark Eldar and Slaanash armies. 
30024
Post by: A Black Ram
When I first saw this piece the day it was on CMON, all I could think of was the movie ''Casualties of War'', where a squad of men become unstable and rape,torure and among other things to women. Art is art, like my art teacher said to my painting of Abaddon, ''I don't care if it's inappropriate,it's my art show ''. He finds art to be a true form of telling opinions, and he didn't care if the principal saw A violent marine with trophies decorating his body.
Go for whatever man. Art will not always please everyone, this kinda giving the message '' just because they are the humans doesn't mean they always are the good guys''.
Think district 9.
284
Post by: Augustus
I think there is even a subtler story being told if you know some history of the Eldar. It makes the piece really Ironic.
To summarize:
The Fall of the Eldar was what gave rise to the current Imperium of man, and it came about when the Excesses of Eldar Hedonism gave rise to the Chaos God of Pleasure, Slanesh.
The birth of that god was such a powerful event as to rend the very fabric of space time and cause most of the misery of mankind when the Golden Age of science came to an end and the Emperor then had to go on the crusades to reunify the galaxy, the war of which is still raging in the time line.
There's a great irony in Imperial troops depicted about to abuse an Eldar because, per the timeline the entire plight of Humanity and the Empire's struggle against Chaos and the rise of the Emperor after the Crusades can all be laid at the feet of the Eldar and the Fall.
PAYBAX in short.
9370
Post by: Accolade
In my opinion, I think that the "you're a hypocrite if you are repulsed by the sexuality of this piece but are okay with extreme violence" isn't necessarily a fair point.
I think the difference between this piece and, say, the Dark Eldar slave models has to do with the present action of the models in question. That is to say, the slave models are not in the position of being raped, but are simply in a situation where it is a likelihood/possibility. You are free to choose in your mind which direction you will take with this, but the course is not spelled out to you. You can also compare the Dark Eldar slave models to the Wet Nurse Kingdom Death model that was creating quite a stir a month ago: the models in this piece are in the present position of rape/the process is actively occurring. Were the exact same female models put in less leading positions next to that models, I think the response would be a bit different. With this being said, I feel it not simply the fact of rape that is disturbing, but the fact that is in action, and as such I think you can apply this same argument to other gratuitous acts, including torture.
The issue with rape itself comes from the fact that it is a highly malicious and self-gratifying act that occurs on a defenseless target. Torture can function under the same setting. I wonder if people might have the same reaction to a diorama of demons committing violent acts against chained-up/cornered defenseless humans. I remember actually having a bit of a reaction to a piece of Tyranid art where rippers were actively eating a still-living guardsmen, screaming in agony. However, the same response is not necessarily elicited from two forces of *equivalent* power engaged in attacking each other. Both groups attacks, be it demons v. humans, are single-minded: the expedited destruction of the other. However, with torture/rape, the intentions are different. The goal is not only to inflict death on the enemy, but to draw the process out as long as possible and to do so in a manner than gives the attacker mental/emotional gratification. It is harder for people to accept the thought of beings doing this, because it is at such odds with their own views.
All-in-all, I think it boils down to defenselessness of the said target. I think it applies to all acts, be they rape, torture, mass genocide, etc.
22687
Post by: MajorTom11
Lint wrote:MajorTom11 wrote:And ya, it's this kinda gak response that's not helping. It's not funny dude. It's not something you should laugh at at the best of times, and frankly, in a thread full of people with strong feelings, that kind of comment really derails what could otherwise be an enjoyable if intense debate.
Jokes like that belong on x-box live man. lol
Nothing wrong with injecting humour into the debate... It's like laughing at cartoon characters burning eachother with flamethrowers. Obviously if you saw it happening irl it would not be something to laugh at. Maybe you didn't get the sarcasm in the joke?
I get what you are going for, and in most cases I'd laugh... but the 'other side' would catch that and lump the rest of us trying to be serious about discussing it in with you as if you were serious... I did see your previous post while writing this and it makes it much clearer your line of jokezez tho
6454
Post by: Cryonicleech
It's edgy, it's dodgy.
It happens.
Overall, meh. There are only implications to this, this only has meaning, if we give it meaning.
Honestly? We know what's going to happen. So what? Yes, it's a terrible thing, and quite controversial to depict, but honestly, it's just another human act. We give it meaning by choice.
6229
Post by: Gearhead
Accolade wrote:In my opinion, I think that the "you're a hypocrite if you are repulsed by the sexuality of this piece but are okay with extreme violence" isn't necessarily a fair point.
I've been seeing this quite a lot over on CMON, and I'm sick of it, especially since there isn't a single shred of evidence presented that any poster who has said they don't like this piece has actually stood up and applauded any depiction of extreme violence.
My own $.02 is that, even though we're in a hobby that depicts conflict and violence (and yes depravity, you sick, sick DE/ EC players you!) and all sorts of unspeakable horrors go on in the universes (fictional or otherwise) in which gamers play, there's usually a degree of restraint when presenting the material. Some go a bit too heavy on the grimdark, and when they do I look elsewhere. I like a degree of fantasy in my hobby; it's a chance to use my imagination a bit and have fun. I find over-the-top gory violence distasteful (both in miniature and in film,) and seek my entertainment elsewhere. But when something like imminent rape (or even attempted; she just might reach that knife and show 'em all what's what,) is presented, then suddenly the hobby stops being fun for me, and is suddenly invaded with reminders of the very real and horrible things that people do to each other, some of which I have to deal with regularly at work (believe me, if you ever have to treat someone who is a victim of rape, you'll suddenly find that you have absolutely no sense of humor where it is concerned.) I thought about "Casualties of War" too, A.B.R., when I saw this piece, which accounts for some of the strength of my reaction to it.
While I love miniature painting, and am constantly delighted at the imagination, skill, dedication, and talent that so many artists and sculptors display, I draw the line at pretentious "high art" that purports to "make a statement" or "evoke a reaction" or other such nonsense. And I also think that it is unnecessary to go some places; this is one of them. Some of Nakotina's work ranks very high on my list of favorites, and I'm disappointed that he went this direction. I'm not at all convinced that he was trying for any high-minded artistic endeavor, and the very name "Alien Contact" seems to be making a joke of the entire situation which, combined with various visual/technical elements, leaves me with more of a "hurr hurr, boobies!" impression than anything else.
29279
Post by: jackanory
Well it boils down to what you want to get out of the hobby really Gearhead. For you it might just be about the fun and games but others might want to inject a bit of thought into it (I'm not condoning or condemning either side of the coin by the way). I think what the OP has managed to do is to make me stop and think for a moment about the realities of this game. Maybe we do trivialise the scenes we're depicting too much sometimes, and maybe we need to be reminded that real war isn't fun and games at all, or at least it shouldn't be.
I'd like to read what the OP has to say about the intention of the piece.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Frazzled wrote:Monster Rain wrote:Does there need to be a diorama about it? It's an overarching theme throughout all of 40k. But forget about genocide, then. What about the art that depict graphic violence? Why is that less of a problem?
graphic violence against killer fungi...
Okay.
Raping a space elf is more serious?
9370
Post by: Accolade
jackanory wrote:I'd like to read what the OP has to say about the intention of the piece.
I'm going by what he said in posting this, and please understand I am not attempting to attack him personally, but instead I am trying to take apart the defense of "if you like violence but not sex/rape, you're a hypocrite". I think pointing out that he does not condone rape does nothing for his argument for this piece. Exactly who would support it? Making this disclaimer does nothing to change the nature of this piece. As for the "don't blame me if you like violence," I explained this in my last post, it has less to do with the graphic qualities and more about the use of power over another defenseless creature.
Monster Rain wrote:Frazzled wrote:Monster Rain wrote:Does there need to be a diorama about it? It's an overarching theme throughout all of 40k. But forget about genocide, then. What about the art that depict graphic violence? Why is that less of a problem?
graphic violence against killer fungi...
Okay.
Raping a space elf is more serious?
Space elves are just human analogs. They might as well be humans with pointy ears, they're so identical. When you look at the piece, especially with no 40k background, you see soldiers engaged in rape of a female in space suit. So I can see why people take this seriously. Yes 40k is quite silly at times, but I don't think calling them space elves in this situation balances out against depictions of war between human and giant green humans (i.e. orks).
This being said, I wouldn't really be okay if this was a Tau female or even some big Tyranid bug. It is still domination/torture over another. It is not the human being that is alone in this defense.
11610
Post by: Tzeentchling9
I'm kind of surprised that so many people have such an issue with this and(supposedly) play the game at the same time.
I suppose your models on the tabletop are only playing paintball in the shooting phase and just tagging each other out in the assault phase?
9370
Post by: Accolade
Tzeentchling9 wrote:I'm kind of surprised that so many people have such an issue with this and(supposedly) play the game at the same time.
I suppose your models on the tabletop are only playing paintball in the shooting phase and just tagging each other out in the assault phase?
We all understand this is a game about war, and war is chock-full of atrocities, innumerable and wretched as they are. Rape is consequence of war. Nobody is arguing about the reality of war or the material the game is about. What we are arguing about is the depiction of acts of domination and torture over *largely* defenseless being. Although it is being displayed through the medium of 4k, it doesn't just apply to this game. It applies to any art form in which it is described. For me, it's not as though I'm okay with the topic if it's displayed in a movie or written in a book as compared to little figurines...I am still uncomfortable with it.
Another point that has been on my mind has to do with the genders in this situation, which goes back to the Wet Nurse Kingdom Death model. I sincerely doubt that you would see the level of support for this model if it were depicting men raping each other. I am somewhat curious what effect being a guy has on your outlook of this piece, being what it is. I also think that this diorama would be offensive to most females; (I would believe) it's a completely different viewpoint on the other side.
I think part of the reason I am making a such big deal about this is because whenever someone brings up opposition to the piece, they are shot down automatically for playing this game about war. It's as though the two viewpoints about enjoying a relatively dark-themed tabletop war game and being uncomfortable with displays of torture and rape are mutually exclusive, that I find the most irritating.
30301
Post by: Laughing God
P/M: Great work on the painting and modeling. You truly have talent. The colors for everything were perfect and really caught the mood. My suggestions are that you could have made the eldar guardian more tattered looking rather that just "oops my boob plate fell off... but at least my armor is spotless  ". Kinda just made it seem a attemt at showing people ur passion for elf boobs rather than capturing the seriousness and artistic side to the piece. Also how the guy is holding the chest piece doesnt sit right with me for some reson... just looks unatural.
Fluff: This is an eldar who lived thousands of years and has used alot of it training and fighting for war. Male of female eldar stand much taller than average humans and are much stronger and faster. I think she will likely take that lasgun from that guy and rape them all with it in the next scene. Also do eldar even have compatable reproductive organs to humans? They are aliens for all intents and purposes dispite there outwardly human appearence... idk if its even anotomically possible for human males to mate with eldar females. I know back in rouge trader days there were human/eldar hybrids but they drifted away from that. All irrelivant as the clear point is shock value and that artist clear attention to detail both modeling and paint wise.
Morality: Some people need to grow up. Yes its a harsh topic, but in my analitical mind its no different than any other act of violence or torture that 40k paints in our minds. Slaaneshi daemons are written as doing far worse than whats depicted here. The only difference here is the splash of sexuality involved with the violence. This makes some people uncomfortable as in most societies rape is one of the ultimate social tabboos and rightly so. This doesnt mean we should sherk away from it or sweep the subject under the rug because it makes the insecure squeemish, look at it, accept it happens, feel the spectum of emotions it evokes, then move on with your day, be an adult. Look at it like you would anyother graphic piece of art. But its just as much a part of 40k as anything else and FOR ADULT AUDENCES this is a very origional and well thought out way of depicting just another facet of our grimdark universe we like to escape to once and awhile.
REAL LIFE!: On the real side of things this is a good chance to raise awarness for this hanous crime. 1 in 4 women over the age of 18 have been raped in some form or another in there life (in america, srry forgot to add that for you guys over the pond... ur not a sick as us apparently  ). The shame and fact that IT IS such a social taboo means that most women wont speak out about it and will just pretend it never happend, meaning that offenders arent brought to justice and in all likely hood will repet there crimes. Take a stand against this, shine light on to this dark topic and look for ways you can help lower these sickening statistics and the poor victims of a crime that doesnt need to be so frequent.
32915
Post by: Ghiest1
Hello,
I saw this a few days ago and showed it to a friend, we both mentioned how it was a well done piece and told the story it was supposed to, that said I found it disturbing as a subject, but not over done, not for shock value, so it did what all art is supposed to, create a emotional response. Great job on the piece.
Regards,
Carl
37127
Post by: poontangler
I think this scene is a reminder that war is hell.
30556
Post by: Nakatan
jackanory wrote:
I'd like to read what the OP has to say about the intention of the piece.
It took 2 months to complete (yeah, i slow painter/modeller)
I wanted to do a scene never seen before, and i personally have a painting-modelling experience i never have before. That `boobs` (and her belly, and, hardest of all her left leg) was test of my modeller skills - i like to sculpt and i needed some trainig. it was really hard for me to do the boobs same-sized!)
I put that obivous knife in the dirt to point out - she CAN escape.
and yeah)... i forgot to do tank tracks) actually there are one track, but this is not enough)
20983
Post by: Ratius
From a modellng, painting and sculpting perspective it is extremely well done, yes there are minor flaws but the details are excellent.
As for the subject matter, Im 50/50 on it, personally I do think its a little too grim dark for 40k, as someone mentioned in the other locked thread, yes 40k is grimdark but its done in an over the top, almost comical way.
Take the Orks for example, they are arguably ther most ultraviolent and destructive race in the game but every codex portrays them as having this almost happy go lucky, comical feel to them, hence it takes the edge off their extreme violence.
Nurgle, portrayed as one of the evil Chaos Gods is nicknamed "Grandfather". Come on, thats almost cute in its conotations.
Space Marines, some of the most vicious killers in the Galaxy are often portrayed as honourable and likable in many cases.
etc etc etc
Having said that I agree that scenes like this are part of war and as such can be included as legitimate subject matter.
I'll echo another posters question: If this was a scene from FoW with some Germans surrounding a French freedom fighter or from say a modern day war game with a group of Somali gangsters around a US female Marine would it illicit the same responses?
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Monster Rain wrote:Okay.
Raping a space elf is more serious?
It's not about what is the more serious and forcing comparisons with the various other horrors of war, some things are more affecting than others regardless of the prison sentence they would carry. Most people would agree that one human life is worth the same as another, but the graphic suffering of children affects people more than the pain of men. That's just the way it is and why the suffering of children on TV provides the images of greatest impact from any conflict. By the arguments here, if we're happy to see games where men die, then we should have no issue with the mass butchering of a nursery of children.
29403
Post by: Listrel
For me the piece shows a lot of hope for the Eldar's escape the knife every one has pointed out, the grim defiant look on her face, and the knowledge we have as followers of the hobby that Eldar are fast agile well trained warriors. I feel that her posture and her face hint that she knows that there is the guards man behind her and that she is formulating an escape plan in her head. I think it's obvious who the the true ring leaders of this squad are, both the officer and the sergeant have no control of the situation. The sergeant seams distracted from the situation as if weighing up his own actions and how to act next, the officer is simply helping the other guys in there actions while the driver comes across as the lackey watching from the side lines. That at least is my interpretation of the scene.
As for the fluff I don't see how this couldn't happen simply based on imperial doctrine. Yes as a whole the ideals of the imperium are such that no human would soil them self in this way but we all know that this isn't the way every single human feels in the 40K universe. Many imperial regiments are formed from gangers, prisoners, and the general dregs of society, why then would it be unthinkable for some of these people to carry out such acts ?
The artistic merits of the piece are clear for all to see the painting and modelling skills involved are beyond question I think that's almost the only thing we all agree on here. I have no criticism to add that hasn't already been pointed out. I just wish i could paint faces half as well, mine are generally expressionless and I just can't do eye's so the way you have detailed the skin and faces in particular are my favourite aspects of the piece as a whole.
The subject matter is obviously controversial but no more then we see depicted in films, art (of allkinds ), books, TV shows both fictional and documentary , comics, computer games, internet sites, and so on. Rape is simply a subject that many will accept in different ways, personally I see no problem with this to me it is neither pornographic or vulgar. However many out there as shown in this thread alone will feel very differently. I believe that you could show this piece to victims of rape and get exactly the same divided opinions. It is a simple fact that if you don't like this piece don't look at it and by all means say why you don't like it but don't berate the artist with out reason.
In closing I like the piece the work is of an out standing level and portrays some thing that many would find impossible to show in a tasteful way if at all. The subject mater although controversial is a fact of life be it our real life or the fictional world that a game is based. This is clearly not a gaming piece and not for children it will never be shown in white dwarf or displayed at games day but it was created as a show case and I feel the artist has delivered in so many ways.
33004
Post by: Elmodiddly
Whilst the diorama is very well done ineed and there has been some restraint shown which was good to see as the scene depicted could be a few different translations, the most shocking bit of the whole thing is
WARNING! SHOCKING CONTENT! 18+ Absolutely NO minors and hypocrites!
Now that I DO have issues with. You have already sanctified your creation, have already some up with arguments for the subject matter and, most disgustingly, already judged those who might object as hypocrites!
22749
Post by: Lycaeus Wrex
Laughing God wrote:Morality: Some people need to grow up. Yes its a harsh topic, but in my analitical mind its no different than any other act of violence or torture that 40k paints in our minds. Slaaneshi daemons are written as doing far worse than whats depicted here. The only difference here is the splash of sexuality involved with the violence. This makes some people uncomfortable as in most societies rape is one of the ultimate social tabboos and rightly so. This doesnt mean we should sherk away from it or sweep the subject under the rug because it makes the insecure squeemish, look at it, accept it happens, feel the spectum of emotions it evokes, then move on with your day, be an adult. Look at it like you would anyother graphic piece of art. But its just as much a part of 40k as anything else and FOR ADULT AUDENCES this is a very origional and well thought out way of depicting just another facet of our grimdark universe we like to escape to once and awhile.
Excellently put sir!
L. Wrex
221
Post by: Frazzled
Gearhead wrote:Accolade wrote:In my opinion, I think that the "you're a hypocrite if you are repulsed by the sexuality of this piece but are okay with extreme violence" isn't necessarily a fair point.
I've been seeing this quite a lot over on CMON, and I'm sick of it, especially since there isn't a single shred of evidence presented that any poster who has said they don't like this piece has actually stood up and applauded any depiction of extreme violence.
My own $.02 is that, even though we're in a hobby that depicts conflict and violence (and yes depravity, you sick, sick DE/ EC players you!) and all sorts of unspeakable horrors go on in the universes (fictional or otherwise) in which gamers play, there's usually a degree of restraint when presenting the material. Some go a bit too heavy on the grimdark, and when they do I look elsewhere. I like a degree of fantasy in my hobby; it's a chance to use my imagination a bit and have fun. I find over-the-top gory violence distasteful (both in miniature and in film,) and seek my entertainment elsewhere. But when something like imminent rape (or even attempted; she just might reach that knife and show 'em all what's what,) is presented, then suddenly the hobby stops being fun for me, and is suddenly invaded with reminders of the very real and horrible things that people do to each other, some of which I have to deal with regularly at work (believe me, if you ever have to treat someone who is a victim of rape, you'll suddenly find that you have absolutely no sense of humor where it is concerned.) I thought about "Casualties of War" too, A.B.R., when I saw this piece, which accounts for some of the strength of my reaction to it.
While I love miniature painting, and am constantly delighted at the imagination, skill, dedication, and talent that so many artists and sculptors display, I draw the line at pretentious "high art" that purports to "make a statement" or "evoke a reaction" or other such nonsense. And I also think that it is unnecessary to go some places; this is one of them. Some of Nakotina's work ranks very high on my list of favorites, and I'm disappointed that he went this direction. I'm not at all convinced that he was trying for any high-minded artistic endeavor, and the very name "Alien Contact" seems to be making a joke of the entire situation which, combined with various visual/technical elements, leaves me with more of a "hurr hurr, boobies!" impression than anything else.
Exactly.
30301
Post by: Laughing God
Frazzled wrote: Gearhead wrote:Accolade wrote:In my opinion, I think that the "you're a hypocrite if you are repulsed by the sexuality of this piece but are okay with extreme violence" isn't necessarily a fair point.
I've been seeing this quite a lot over on CMON, and I'm sick of it, especially since there isn't a single shred of evidence presented that any poster who has said they don't like this piece has actually stood up and applauded any depiction of extreme violence.
My own $.02 is that, even though we're in a hobby that depicts conflict and violence (and yes depravity, you sick, sick DE/ EC players you!) and all sorts of unspeakable horrors go on in the universes (fictional or otherwise) in which gamers play, there's usually a degree of restraint when presenting the material. Some go a bit too heavy on the grimdark, and when they do I look elsewhere. I like a degree of fantasy in my hobby; it's a chance to use my imagination a bit and have fun. I find over-the-top gory violence distasteful (both in miniature and in film,) and seek my entertainment elsewhere. But when something like imminent rape (or even attempted; she just might reach that knife and show 'em all what's what,) is presented, then suddenly the hobby stops being fun for me, and is suddenly invaded with reminders of the very real and horrible things that people do to each other, some of which I have to deal with regularly at work (believe me, if you ever have to treat someone who is a victim of rape, you'll suddenly find that you have absolutely no sense of humor where it is concerned.) I thought about "Casualties of War" too, A.B.R., when I saw this piece, which accounts for some of the strength of my reaction to it.
While I love miniature painting, and am constantly delighted at the imagination, skill, dedication, and talent that so many artists and sculptors display, I draw the line at pretentious "high art" that purports to "make a statement" or "evoke a reaction" or other such nonsense. And I also think that it is unnecessary to go some places; this is one of them. Some of Nakotina's work ranks very high on my list of favorites, and I'm disappointed that he went this direction. I'm not at all convinced that he was trying for any high-minded artistic endeavor, and the very name "Alien Contact" seems to be making a joke of the entire situation which, combined with various visual/technical elements, leaves me with more of a "hurr hurr, boobies!" impression than anything else.
Exactly.
My question to both of you then is do you disagree with any form of brutal art that might suggest sexual violence or suffering? If you saw a painting or sculpture in a gallery eluding to pain and suffering perhaps in a sexual nature would you say the piece never should have been made?
How is this any different? Because it’s based in a fictional theme you play?
Just curious
30556
Post by: Nakatan
Elmodiddly wrote:Whilst the diorama is very well done ineed and there has been some restraint shown which was good to see as the scene depicted could be a few different translations, the most shocking bit of the whole thing is
WARNING! SHOCKING CONTENT! 18+ Absolutely NO minors and hypocrites!
Now that I DO have issues with. You have already sanctified your creation, have already some up with arguments for the subject matter and, most disgustingly, already judged those who might object as hypocrites!
As i said before, on our russian forum that diorama gathered 16 pages of rather aggressive comments and flood. Here on Dakka it had been banned in a gallery, Astronomican forum banned this as well. Some people on cmon and other forums say some truly disgusting and offencive things about me, somebody `because there were no warnig about content and they were forced to watch this`. So when i posted subj here, i posted a warn too. just simple as that. And i already said enough about hypocrisy and double standarts all around the world. If somebody counts that theme `tabooed`, he will read the warning. No offence in my words, no offence in my works.
735
Post by: JOHIRA
A couple of points:
1) It's absolutely fine (and in fact, healthy IMHO) that some people don't care for this diorama (though I think it's fantastic). But surely we should all be able to agree that launching personal attacks at Nakatan for it is inappropriate.
2) I don't think it's fair to call this scene GRIMDARK. GRIMDARK is a sarcastic description of the over-the-top-ness of 40K. When whole worlds get virus-bombed just to stamp out a cult or Khorne berzerkers spend 20,000 years in the warp practicing killing, it takes things into unrelatable territory. What makes GRIMDARK GRIMDARK isn't that it's uncomfortable or painful or scary- it's that it's enormous in scope and teaspoon-shallow in depth. 40K takes place on a scale that is vast and impersonal and in doing so loses most of it's relatability. There aren't real people in 40K, just larger-than-life heroes and villains who can apparently wade through an inferno unharmed as long as they shout and point and hold their swords over their heads while they walk. And that GRIMDARKness exists so that the people playing with toy soldiers don't have to stop and think about the morality of their characters. Everything is too big and abstract for most people to really feel like it matters. Hence, GRIMDARK.
Nakatan's piece doesn't have any of that. It has real human feeling. These characters have been a part of the human experience for as long as we've been around. It's not larger-than-life. And I would wager that a lot of the objection people have toward it is that it makes them confront uncomfortable feelings they'd rather not imagine. Maybe that's why we've had so many people protest that real Imperial Guardsmen would never have such close contact with an alien. If people can have that kind of emotional reaction to Nakatan's diorama, then it definitely is not GRIMDARK. You may not like it, and that's okay. But give it the credit it's due.
30301
Post by: Laughing God
JOHIRA wrote:A couple of points:
1) It's absolutely fine (and in fact, healthy IMHO) that some people don't care for this diorama (though I think it's fantastic). But surely we should all be able to agree that launching personal attacks at Nakatan for it is inappropriate.
2) I don't think it's fair to call this scene GRIMDARK. GRIMDARK is a sarcastic description of the over-the-top-ness of 40K. When whole worlds get virus-bombed just to stamp out a cult or Khorne berzerkers spend 20,000 years in the warp practicing killing, it takes things into unrelatable territory. What makes GRIMDARK GRIMDARK isn't that it's uncomfortable or painful or scary- it's that it's enormous in scope and teaspoon-shallow in depth. 40K takes place on a scale that is vast and impersonal and in doing so loses most of it's relatability. There aren't real people in 40K, just larger-than-life heroes and villains who can apparently wade through an inferno unharmed as long as they shout and point and hold their swords over their heads while they walk. And that GRIMDARKness exists so that the people playing with toy soldiers don't have to stop and think about the morality of their characters. Everything is too big and abstract for most people to really feel like it matters. Hence, GRIMDARK.
Nakatan's piece doesn't have any of that. It has real human feeling. These characters have been a part of the human experience for as long as we've been around. It's not larger-than-life. And I would wager that a lot of the objection people have toward it is that it makes them confront uncomfortable feelings they'd rather not imagine. Maybe that's why we've had so many people protest that real Imperial Guardsmen would never have such close contact with an alien. If people can have that kind of emotional reaction to Nakatan's diorama, then it definitely is not GRIMDARK. You may not like it, and that's okay. But give it the credit it's due.
QFT
36360
Post by: Aurelia
It took quite a while to think of what to post on this...
...modelling/painting wise its exceptional, composition wise its abysmal. Now before you jump on me for saying that I actually do have some personal reference for this: I have played some fairly dark rpgs in the past and a few years ago I decided to look into the reality of certain things... I was going through a phase of looking into psycology and such... so I challenged myself to confront the acts in my own way. I researched rape and its effects quite heavilly and drew two pictures depicting scenes similar to the one here... the prelude to the possibility of it. I made sure the anatomy was correct and really pushed myself to be as 'accurate' in the emotion of the moment as I could be. The result was two pieces of work that are graphic and quite frankly, disturbing and thought provoking. And that last bit is where my issue is with this piece: it could have been a thought provoking scene. It is for certain one that has sparked heated debate but fails for one reason... we are debating the piece itself and not the subject it is trying to depict. For me what could have been a fabulous commentary on the morality of war (with perhaps two of the guardmen arguing...) has been taken to a mere low level of a shock piece. ( especially with that title )
The skill with emotional/storytelling capabilites shown on other models the OP has done is utterly absent here. Rather than of deep offense to me it is so much a missed opportunity. I should note this isn't the sort of thing I like to see in artwork of any form simply for the 'pleasure' of seeing it; this subject should only be treated with thought and perhaps most of all, the depiction of it using 40k is a perhaps its biggest mistake - though I haven't fully decided on that myself yet. As for people utterly hating this: quite frankly that is to be accepted and not judged against... were this more emotive I would find it horrible to look at myself, as it should be. But as it stands I simply believe it heavilly flawed.
Now this is just my take on it... not some final judgement... this piece will evoke drastically different responses from everyone.
Edit: And heck NO, my pictures will not be posted anywhere for anyone to see.
18375
Post by: AndrewC
How can any of us sit in judgement of this piece?
We can only look at it and express our opinion of it, we cannot condone it as being fit, right, wrong, offensive whatever. It is what it is.
We play a game in which acts of exteme violence are accepted as the norm. I remember a diorama a few years back which depicted the execution of a guardsman by a commissar because he was wounded, should cold blooded murder not be condemned in the same way that this is?
Armaggedon had the entire population of the planet condemned to sterilisation and placed into single sex workcamps until death. Sorry but I didn't see any condemnation for the 'final solution' being depicted there.
If we condemn this piece we should condemn ourselves for taking part in a hobby which makes light of serious issues. At most we should only express our opinion.
In my case, fantastic skill in painting and composing the piece, but not on my list of favorites.
Cheers
Andrew
33004
Post by: Elmodiddly
Nakatan wrote:Elmodiddly wrote:Whilst the diorama is very well done ineed and there has been some restraint shown which was good to see as the scene depicted could be a few different translations, the most shocking bit of the whole thing is
WARNING! SHOCKING CONTENT! 18+ Absolutely NO minors and hypocrites!
Now that I DO have issues with. You have already sanctified your creation, have already some up with arguments for the subject matter and, most disgustingly, already judged those who might object as hypocrites!
As i said before, on our russian forum that diorama gathered 16 pages of rather aggressive comments and flood. Here on Dakka it had been banned in a gallery, Astronomican forum banned this as well. Some people on cmon and other forums say some truly disgusting and offencive things about me, somebody `because there were no warnig about content and they were forced to watch this`. So when i posted subj here, i posted a warn too. just simple as that. And i already said enough about hypocrisy and double standarts all around the world. If somebody counts that theme `tabooed`, he will read the warning. No offence in my words, no offence in my works.
There is an issue here with what you call hypocrisy and what people try to shoehorn into an acceptable genre using pseudo-educated arguments about war being an adult subject so therefore all aspects of war are fine to add into the hobby. If I don't like your diorama because it is a subject I don't like, I am the hypocrite? Don't think so.
You could have just said "Here's my diorama it is of an adult theme" that would have been it because the diorama is open to interpretation. It isn't what the thing is because that is well done, it is how you've done it.
You're posting an item which you label as 18+ only, which you say is about rape, on a website where there are children present in abundance. Knowing full well that you have put an adult themed photo on an open website which is frequented by children is pretty disgusting IMO.
Then again that is the whole point, isn't it; to illicit a response and get attention?
33892
Post by: MADLarkin
I love the fading conscript stripe on that one guardsmen. Of all the things to notice...
33868
Post by: winnertakesall
FLAME WARS!
Straying a bit from the origional subject here, but it clearly says no under 18's, same thing with pornagraphic websites (not that I would know **cough**)
If you are under 18, dont press it, same thing thing with pornagrapic websites, both he and them have fordilled their obligation to warn any people that
stray onto there that the following pages contain elicit pictures.
On another note, its a great looking diorama, very realistic that must have been damn hard to do!
221
Post by: Frazzled
AndrewC wrote:How can any of us sit in judgement of this piece?
Its on the Showcase forum.
18375
Post by: AndrewC
Frazzled wrote:Its on the Showcase forum.
Frazzled, you missed the point.
We can and should comment on his ability to paint and model figures. We should not make judgement on what it depicts.
So if I were to create and model a diarama of the population of Armageddon being led into work/concentration camps it would be acceptable?
Cheers
Andrew
22687
Post by: MajorTom11
AndrewC wrote:
So if I were to create and model a diorama of the population of Armageddon being led into work/concentration camps it would be acceptable?
Very good point Andrew, this is most definitely in the fluff, and if anything may be an even more sensitive topic.
963
Post by: Mannahnin
JOHIRA wrote:A couple of points:
1) It's absolutely fine (and in fact, healthy IMHO) that some people don't care for this diorama (though I think it's fantastic). But surely we should all be able to agree that launching personal attacks at Nakatan for it is inappropriate.
2) I don't think it's fair to call this scene GRIMDARK. GRIMDARK is a sarcastic description of the over-the-top-ness of 40K. When whole worlds get virus-bombed just to stamp out a cult or Khorne berzerkers spend 20,000 years in the warp practicing killing, it takes things into unrelatable territory. What makes GRIMDARK GRIMDARK isn't that it's uncomfortable or painful or scary- it's that it's enormous in scope and teaspoon-shallow in depth. 40K takes place on a scale that is vast and impersonal and in doing so loses most of it's relatability. There aren't real people in 40K, just larger-than-life heroes and villains who can apparently wade through an inferno unharmed as long as they shout and point and hold their swords over their heads while they walk. And that GRIMDARKness exists so that the people playing with toy soldiers don't have to stop and think about the morality of their characters. Everything is too big and abstract for most people to really feel like it matters. Hence, GRIMDARK.
Nakatan's piece doesn't have any of that. It has real human feeling. These characters have been a part of the human experience for as long as we've been around. It's not larger-than-life. And I would wager that a lot of the objection people have toward it is that it makes them confront uncomfortable feelings they'd rather not imagine. Maybe that's why we've had so many people protest that real Imperial Guardsmen would never have such close contact with an alien. If people can have that kind of emotional reaction to Nakatan's diorama, then it definitely is not GRIMDARK. You may not like it, and that's okay. But give it the credit it's due.
One of the best posts in the thread. I lthink pieces like this are worth doing occasionally, and I argely like the piece, though I think the execution of the Eldar figure is significantly flawed and lets it down. But Johira aptly summarizes, IMO, why a lot of people find it offputting without being hypocritical.
33868
Post by: winnertakesall
AndrewC wrote:Frazzled wrote:Its on the Showcase forum.
Frazzled, you missed the point.
We can and should comment on his ability to paint and model figures. We should not make judgement on what it depicts.
So if I were to create and model a diarama of the population of Armageddon being led into work/concentration camps it would be acceptable?
Cheers
Andrew
Oh Snap!
I do think there has been a massive over-reaction about this, and the whole thing has descended into a flame war.
221
Post by: Frazzled
AndrewC wrote:Frazzled wrote:Its on the Showcase forum.
Frazzled, you missed the point.
We can and should comment on his ability to paint and model figures. We should not make judgement on what it depicts.
So if I were to create and model a diarama of the population of Armageddon being led into work/concentration camps it would be acceptable?
Cheers
Andrew
respectfully, bs.
963
Post by: Mannahnin
I do think there has been a massive over-reaction about this, and the whole thing has descended into a flame war.
No it hasn't. That's the cool thing. Opinions are divided, and a few feathers have been ruffled, but 95%+ of the comments have been considered, and I have seen very few flames.
Overall, good job guys. Keep it up.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Mannahnin wrote:I do think there has been a massive over-reaction about this, and the whole thing has descended into a flame war.
No it hasn't. That's the cool thing. Opinions are divided, and a few feathers have been ruffled, but 95%+ of the comments have been considered, and I have seen very few flames.
Overall, good job guys. Keep it up.
Except that Frazzled guy. He's kind of a meanie.
26697
Post by: Lt. Coldfire
Absolutely glorious paintjob. Not a big fan of the Codex: Rape part of it though.
16387
Post by: Manchu
AndrewC wrote:So if I were to create and model a diarama of the population of Armageddon being led into work/concentration camps it would be acceptable?
I think this is a great idea for a diorama. And it's a great contribution to this discussion. In that story, the Space Wolves stand in for IRL rage over the grimdark (which as a term is not actually just a comment about how OTT 40k is). There has been significant discussion in this thread about the allegedly ambivalent guardsmen and about the idea of a commissar coming along to punish these guardsmen (for various reasons). Maybe, unlike the SW at Armageddon, the narrative that this diorama tells doesn't give us enough of a in-story pressure release (we just have that knife and the reputation of Eldar reflexes) for our feelings of revulsion and general uncomfortablility with the possibilities. But in my opinion that makes the piece all the more effective.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Couldn't agree more, Manchu.
I would put even odds that the Psyker alien chick within easy reach of a knife will be able to make a move. Especially considering she only has one BS3 Flashlight to "intimidate" her.
22687
Post by: MajorTom11
Frazz, jeeze man as a Mod shouldn't you be encouraging measured and reasonable debate, and, no matter what your personal opinion, still be open to the idea that others may feel subjectively differently without being 'wrong'?
963
Post by: Mannahnin
I think the idea Aurelia had, about possibly having two of the guardsmen arguing, could have been cool too. Maybe still have one of them have his pants unbuckled.
Is there a badge or medal for IG to earn for Xenos Hate or Purity in general? Something from the Imperial Infantryman's Uplifting Primer, mayhap? It'd be cool if the guy arguing had a symbol like that on him, perhaps to give the implication that maybe the reason he's arguing is not out of mercy, but out of concern for contamination by The Alien. That'd be really 40k.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Lt. Coldfire wrote:Absolutely glorious paintjob. Not a big fan of the Codex: Rape part of it though.
Exactly. Automatically Appended Next Post: MajorTom11 wrote:Frazz, jeeze man as a Mod shouldn't you be encouraging measured and reasonable debate, and, no matter what your personal opinion, still be open to the idea that others may feel subjectively differently without being 'wrong'?
I am not saying they can't feel differently, indeed thats partly why I am ranting. Thats NOT being extended to those who disagree with the efficacy of this work.
30556
Post by: Nakatan
Elmodiddly wrote:Nakatan wrote:Elmodiddly wrote:Whilst the diorama is very well done ineed and there has been some restraint shown which was good to see as the scene depicted could be a few different translations, the most shocking bit of the whole thing is
WARNING! SHOCKING CONTENT! 18+ Absolutely NO minors and hypocrites!
You're posting an item which you label as 18+ only, which you say is about rape, on a website where there are children present in abundance. Knowing full well that you have put an adult themed photo on an open website which is frequented by children is pretty disgusting IMO.
coolmini is an adult site. it is what its adminisration says and it is present in the registration form. If somebody`s children go to site where boobs and gore all around, well, i can do nothing about this. and i didn`t remember to call you a hypocrite. But certainly, some of them labeled me as perverted monster already.
16387
Post by: Manchu
OP makes a good point: calling him a perverted monster or any variation of this is a violation of Rule Number One. Mannahnin is right to praise the general tone of this thread for focusing on the piece rather than speculative insults directed at the hobbyist. Let's keep it that way. Thanks!
33004
Post by: Elmodiddly
AndrewC wrote:Frazzled wrote:Its on the Showcase forum.
Frazzled, you missed the point.
We can and should comment on his ability to paint and model figures. We should not make judgement on what it depicts.
Cheers
Andrew
Yes, you can. And should. There are two options to vote for in the galleries section. One is of the paintjob and the other vote buton is the coolness of the subject.
winnertakesall wrote:FLAME WARS!
Straying a bit from the original subject here, but it clearly says no under 18's, same thing with pornagraphic websites (not that I would know **cough**)
If you are under 18, dont press it, same thing thing with pornagrapic websites, both he and them have fordilled their obligation to warn any people that
stray onto there that the following pages contain elicit pictures.
You do not give up any responsibility by saying do not press if under 18. To think so is pure folly. Why not leave your car door open with the keys in but a sign saying do not drive this car if banned or underage or does not belong to you? Or a bottle of alcohol with a similar sign.
You put the temptation up so therefore it IS your responsibility to consider the audience. That is why we have the fething (fired for effect) swear filter on these fething forums; to protect the kids!!
963
Post by: Mannahnin
Agreed. And that being said, Elmodiddly and Johira also have made excellent points that people may have reasonable and legitimate objections to this piece without being hypocrites. It is important for everyone to be respectful and recognize the validity of others varying tastes and opinions.
16387
Post by: Manchu
@Elmodiddly: Please take that discussion (of responsibility to minors regarding websites) to another thread, probably in OT.
29048
Post by: Hangfire
Nakatan that Eldar armour is beautifully painted, mind if I ask what colour you basecoated it and did you highlight to pure white?
Are you sure that guard guy isn't just proving to his mates that weight-watchers works and he's can now use an extra notch on his belt buckle. Meanwhile the other kindly IG holding the breastplate is saying "Hang on love I'll have that fixed in a jiffy."
16387
Post by: Manchu
And her face = "mon'keigh craftsmanship is an oxymoron!"
22749
Post by: Lycaeus Wrex
JOHIRA wrote:A couple of points:
1) It's absolutely fine (and in fact, healthy IMHO) that some people don't care for this diorama (though I think it's fantastic). But surely we should all be able to agree that launching personal attacks at Nakatan for it is inappropriate.
2) I don't think it's fair to call this scene GRIMDARK. GRIMDARK is a sarcastic description of the over-the-top-ness of 40K. When whole worlds get virus-bombed just to stamp out a cult or Khorne berzerkers spend 20,000 years in the warp practicing killing, it takes things into unrelatable territory. What makes GRIMDARK GRIMDARK isn't that it's uncomfortable or painful or scary- it's that it's enormous in scope and teaspoon-shallow in depth. 40K takes place on a scale that is vast and impersonal and in doing so loses most of it's relatability. There aren't real people in 40K, just larger-than-life heroes and villains who can apparently wade through an inferno unharmed as long as they shout and point and hold their swords over their heads while they walk. And that GRIMDARKness exists so that the people playing with toy soldiers don't have to stop and think about the morality of their characters. Everything is too big and abstract for most people to really feel like it matters. Hence, GRIMDARK.
Nakatan's piece doesn't have any of that. It has real human feeling. These characters have been a part of the human experience for as long as we've been around. It's not larger-than-life. And I would wager that a lot of the objection people have toward it is that it makes them confront uncomfortable feelings they'd rather not imagine. Maybe that's why we've had so many people protest that real Imperial Guardsmen would never have such close contact with an alien. If people can have that kind of emotional reaction to Nakatan's diorama, then it definitely is not GRIMDARK. You may not like it, and that's okay. But give it the credit it's due.
Wonderfully put sir.
L. Wrex
ADDENDUM: With regards the poster who mentioned the Armeggedon concentration camps/sweat factories. That again would be an excellent portrayal of something that occurs regularly in our current society, transposed into a reality where infinitely more horrible situations occur. I think that a lot of people are scared nay, terrified, to impart even a small amount of humanity and accountability into a universe that they are quite happy viewing as 'above' such restrictions. The very fact that this piece has garnered over 18 pages of russian and 5 pages of our own debate, as well as being banned for being 'too risque' speaks volumes as to the controversy such a taboo topic will inevitably cause.
I don't want to point fingers and name names, but people need to realise that this stuff *does happen* and rather than sweep it under the rug and degrade the creator, we should instead be embracing this kind of work as it shows that you don't need to put paint to canvas in order to convey an emotional response in the observer which, if I'm not wrong, is what all good art should be trying to do.
L. Wrex
33891
Post by: Grakmar
When I first saw this, I was a little sickened. Not shocked (this is the internet, we've all seen much worse), but I assumed this was the artist's weird fetish.
After contemplating this piece and reading the multiple threads about it, I have to change my opinion.
This truly is a wonderful piece of art. It's gross, and disgusting, and disturbing. It has no place as part of the supported 40k game.
But, none of that detracts from the fact that it challenges the viewer to evaluate their social mores. It has spawned multiple debates about the acceptability of rape vs murder in 40k and in fiction in general. It may disgust the viewer, but that's part of it's intention. It wants to get you thinking and talking about the exact things we're all discussing here.
The craftsmanship of this piece was also top-notch! Well done!
Overall, this is one of the most beautiful pieces I've seen, and it's definitely the most "artistic".
+1 to the artist.
18375
Post by: AndrewC
Elmodiddly wrote:Yes, you can. And should. There are two options to vote for in the galleries section. One is of the paintjob and the other vote buton is the coolness of the subject.
But that is not what people are doing. They are taking it one step further than the coolness factor.
@Manchu, if only I had the skill and ability.
@Frazzled, if you read my earlier posts I agree with you, the subject matter is not one I approve of, but I don't like some of the insinuations made about the sculptor. Grakmar made the statement that this has no place in 40K, but in it's own admission 40K is about ethnic cleansing, absolute power over others, the Inquisition, the degredation and bondage of women within its' society, genocide, slavery, xenophobia and the absolute idea of might makes right.
None of these are right, what makes any of them any more fitting, more palatable, than the implied rape in this piece?
Andrew
32540
Post by: Timonth
Very great diorama! They might have taken the darkness of the situation back a bit if there were some Eldar scouts behind the wreck of the Eldar vehicle ready to pop out and save her, or at least something like that
8666
Post by: Joyous_Oblivion
I did not read through the pages of replies, but I'll say that is a well executed piece of art. The expressions and body language of everyone involved is quite amazing.
I'm not sure why her breasts are exposed...maybe Eldar armour works like that...
Very well done, just not sure of the 'breast factor' though...
735
Post by: JOHIRA
AndrewC wrote:We can and should comment on his ability to paint and model figures. We should not make judgement on what it depicts.
I partly agree, but only partly. Useful criticism is criticism that teaches the artist to do their work better. An artist who wants to improve needs to have an open mind about their own technique, but they also need to understand how people react to their work. It can be extremely stinging to hear that someone rejects the entire premise of your work- that happened a few times to me in my art classes back in college. But even if as an artist you reject their criticism (and if you have a strong sense of what you want to produce, I think you probably should), there is some value in hearing it. It lets you know how your audience thinks.
Now obviously this can be taken too far. If I go into a thread where someone has posted their latest space marine and say, "Nah man, you should have painted an Eldar instead," then I'm being kind of a . But I don't think things have gotten quite to that point in this thread.
37316
Post by: Xanadu
The faces are really well dome on the guardsman, and I agree not everything in war is all bullets and explosions.
37127
Post by: poontangler
Oh come on, look at what that Eldar is wearing, she is practically asking for it!
5832
Post by: jamessearle0
i personally think its a great diorama, i read all the discussions above, and all i really thought was.. noone was raped to create this peice so why are a few people geting upset.
31623
Post by: Lars
The faces and eyes are extremely believable. Well done!
9394
Post by: Malika2
Finally! War with sexual violence in it! Sexual violence (rape, abuse, intimidation, etc) has always been present in war, soldiers raping their prisoners as a means of humiliating them or rape being used as a weapon against the local population, what about the whole custom of prima nocte? Cool to see this nasty element of war present in the 40k universe now!
33891
Post by: Grakmar
Malika2 wrote:what about the whole custom of prima nocte?
Just thought I should point out that this is from a movie, and has little to no actual evidence it ever occurred in real life.
21967
Post by: Tyyr
Took a look at the diorama and I have to say that it was beautifully done. Really impressive technical work. I have to agree though that the way the guy is holding the breastplate is just way off. It honestly looks like he's inspecting the interior for nipple marks or something. A more casual hold down at his side or even just having it cast off would make more sense. I also have to agree that while I like space elf boobies as much as the next guy having nothing underneath the breastplate is strange. A bodyglove would make sense and it could easily be torn to indicate damage. I'm not really sure about her site line either. I like the defiance but you'd think her attention would be on the guy in the midst of dropping trou, not the guy inspecting her breastplate.
In general the subject doesn't really shock me. I can't really turn off the part of my brain that registers just how horrid the 40K universe is. That when someone decides to exterminatus a planet you're talking about killing hundreds of millions of children, that many times even if you win a fight your own side will put you to death "just to be sure," and the myriad of other horrors that pervade this fictional universe. Frankly a group of guys planning on raping a cornered female combatant seems almost... and I hate to say it, pedestrian for 40K. As far as the horrors of the setting go something like this seems downright mundane in a setting where entire planets are cleansed of all life on one megalomanics orders. It's the IG, so in this diorama worst case is raped and then killed, if it was someone like the Dark Eldar or any Slaneesh worshipers that would then become the best possible ending. So in the grand scheme of things while what's being depicted is a horrid act compared to what the background material glosses over this is... meh.
33919
Post by: Moltar
I guess I'll throw my two cents in as well. As said by all, the P & M is outstanding. As for the subject matter...Grim, Dark Future, yeah.. there's some rape in that mix. It's not all bolters and statuatory but it's in there. Sorry folks, the setting of 40k is dark and brutal. Slaanesh marines/KoC/deamons/marauders they all rape. Personally I like that you've pushed the envelope on this one. (**That doesn't mean I'm pro-rape, Trollers**) I understand immature ones won't like it or get it, for that matter, but this stuff happens all the time in practically every single war that has or is taking place on Earth. So why wouldn't it happen in the distant future. The best criticism I've seen on here is about the guardsmen being trained and bred to hate the alien and would despise this act, but guardsmen are human and succumb to Chaos(where do you think all those renegades come from).
I haven't seen this much pointless backlash since someone put a Dark Elf smoking a bong on CMoN.
The setting, painting and modeling are all top notch on this diorama. Most dioramas don't tell more of a story than guy X is attacking guy Y because they're enemies. Excellent work.
And btw Slaanesh demands more boobs for the boob god
29723
Post by: camboyaz
That is not rape! He's just "inspecting the breastplate" and the others or making sure the xenos doesn't run and report their postion to her comrades.
34644
Post by: Mr Nobody
camboyaz wrote:That is not rape! He's just "inspecting the breastplate" and the others or making sure the xenos doesn't run and report their postion to her comrades.
And that one guy is going to show her human anatomy bellow the belt.
16387
Post by: Manchu
Actually, he's putting his pants back on because the ambivalent dude has warned him that a Commissar is heading their way. Or maybe he just took a leak.
The great thing about dioramas is that they capture one moment and leave every moment before an after up to your imagination.
34644
Post by: Mr Nobody
That would be great, add a commisar sneaking up behind them.
35046
Post by: Perkustin
This would happen in the 41st millenium for sure, pushed to the limits every day, sent on suicide missions by incompetent commanders, no escape from military service apart from death, not surprised. Has there been a joke about a successful penetration roll? There has now.....
34605
Post by: spireland
Alright, lets give non-gamers more ammunation to bad mouth gaming!
Really? Someone made a scene of some IG about to go town on another Model? REALLY?
35973
Post by: Gibbsey
Perkustin wrote:This would happen in the 41st millenium for sure, pushed to the limits every day, sent on suicide missions by incompetent commanders, no escape from military service apart from death, not surprised. Has there been a joke about a successful penetration roll? There has now.....
Yeah but he doesn't have rending.....
9370
Post by: Accolade
Well it would seem we have made it to the circle-jerk portion of the thread, with people saying anyone who doesn't like it doesn't grasp the truth of war, and others cracking rape/dice-jokes.
5245
Post by: Buzzsaw
Frazzled wrote:Monster Rain wrote:So genocide is fine for subject material, but rape isnt?
Also, rape is a sexual act Howard. It's not consensual, but you can't act like it doesn't involve sexuality. It's not even necessarily violent.
I'm sorry, when was the last time there was a diorama on genocide again?
Well, I can't say it was the last one, but Zbigniew Libera's LEGO Concentration Camp was designed in 1996. I saw it at the Armory show in New York in 2002, but it was contemporaneously shown at the Jewish Museum in New York.
The above quote though, does serve to encapsulate the biggest problem this discussion faces: Dakka is fine for evaluating the quality of model painting, construction and conversion; things related to modeling and the hobby. It's a really bad place for discussion of art as art, because a) people here simply don't have much serious interested or knowledge about art, and b) most importantly, it's simply not geared to it. Dakka is a TTG site, and it doesn't have pretensions to much more then that.
Asking the opinion of posters on Dakka, or CMON for that matter, is going to give you a very mixed bag of useful and very much less then useful criticism: when Zbigniew Libera made his LEGO concentration Camp, he didn't exhibit it to LEGO fans, he exhibited it at art exhibitions.
Unfortunately Nakatan I see you're in Russia, so I can't direct you to any resources, but you would be well served to try and find more political art exhibitions, even perhaps art festivals produced by groups devoted to combating rape, domestic violence or other crimes against women. It doubtlessly won't be easy going, but I think you would be pleasantly surprised by the response you might receive at such venues.
_________
Having gotten that out of the way, back to the stuff Dakka is good at: asking "How did you do it?!"
Seriously, the level of detail, especially on the faces is mind boggling considering the size. Do you have any resources that could lend insight to your technique?
26697
Post by: Lt. Coldfire
I'm not sure why genocide/killing and rape are being compared here. Warhammer 40k is a fantasy wargame. Fantasy killing, or genocide if you insist on it. It's beside the fact that rape occurrs in current and past wars; must we bring it into a wargame fantasy? If you're fantasizing rape, then maybe you should consider another game.
5245
Post by: Buzzsaw
Lt. Coldfire wrote:I'm not sure why genocide/killing and rape are being compared here. Warhammer 40k is a fantasy wargame. Fantasy killing, or genocide if you insist on it. It's beside the fact that rape occurrs in current and past wars; must we bring it into a wargame fantasy? If you're fantasizing rape, then maybe you should consider another game.
Buzzsaw wrote:The above quote though, does serve to encapsulate the biggest problem this discussion faces: Dakka is fine for evaluating the quality of model painting, construction and conversion; things related to modeling and the hobby. It's a really bad place for discussion of art as art, because a) people here simply don't have much serious interested or knowledge about art, and b) most importantly, it's simply not geared to it. Dakka is a TTG site, and it doesn't have pretensions to much more then that.
Asking the opinion of posters on Dakka, or CMON for that matter, is going to give you a very mixed bag of useful and very much less then useful criticism: when Zbigniew Libera made his LEGO concentration Camp, he didn't exhibit it to LEGO fans, he exhibited it at art exhibitions.
Also;
Manchu wrote:OP makes a good point: calling him a perverted monster or any variation of this is a violation of Rule Number One. Mannahnin is right to praise the general tone of this thread for focusing on the piece rather than speculative insults directed at the hobbyist. Let's keep it that way. Thanks!
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Moltar wrote:Personally I like that you've pushed the envelope on this one. (**That doesn't mean I'm pro-rape, Trollers**)
You'd know all about trolling wouldn't you? Your entire post might as well have "BAIT!" written on it in big, glowing, neon letters with fireworks going off in the fething background.
Or is basically coming out and saying "Everyone who disagrees with me is immature and/or stupid" allowed now?
I need to take a break from Dakka. I'm already to the point where I get banned if I do one more thing wrong, and people post stupid bs like this and practically beg me to flip my gak.
9370
Post by: Accolade
Thank you Sid, I'm in agreement with you. I read that post and thought "exactly who said anyone here was pro-rape?" I"m not sure why this type of passive-aggressive posting is permitted.
963
Post by: Mannahnin
Saying that "immature ones won't like it or get it" is not the same as saying "anyone who doesn't like or get it is immature". All Collies are dogs but not all dogs are Collies, and all that.
I'm letting all three of your posts stand. Sid calling the first post "stupid BS" and "trolling" appears to be a kneejerk reaction based on misunderstanding it, but I'm cutting him some slack, as it appears to be an honest mistake.
Accolade, there was at least one post in these discussions suggesting or outright stating that the diorama promotes rape. I am not sure how someone could think that, but they evidently did, and posted such.
Once again, everyone please remember to be respectful toward other posters.
10127
Post by: Happygrunt
I like it. The man remvoing his pants may be about to lose something very important...
21150
Post by: FerrumIgnatus
Just had a look at the Diorama, and went through the entire thread here at DakkaDakka, and I have to say; What's actually all the fuzz about? Here we have a bunch of guardsmen who've "captured" a female Eldar, and one of them is going to give her "The Emperor's Justice", failing to notice that she's trying to get towards the knife that is half burried in the mud less then a foot away from her. In other words, those Guardsmen are about to feel the fury of a Xeno.
Secondly, seriously.. because of some half-nudity and the "obvious" -note the aphostrophes- attempt at rape some here suggest, people had to discuss it over 6 pages with "It's demeaning!" or "I love it!" and thus started a flame war.. Brilliant.
Now, let me give you chaps and chapettes out there something to think about; the diorama is merely focusing on the grim, dark side of war, and as one can clearly see, these guardsmen are about to die. I do believe that the creator, Nakatan, simply wanted to point out the worst of the worst in the year 40.000 -seriously, there is much worse horsedung on the TV and in books then this little piece of diorama.
So, to sum it all up. Great diorama, very well executed paintjob, and a theme that offends less then some new art, controversial stuff I've seen in art exhibitions.. Kudos, Nakatan. you deserve it.
33919
Post by: Moltar
Sidstyler wrote:Moltar wrote:Personally I like that you've pushed the envelope on this one. (**That doesn't mean I'm pro-rape, Trollers**)
You'd know all about trolling wouldn't you? Your entire post might as well have "BAIT!" written on it in big, glowing, neon letters with fireworks going off in the fething background.
Or is basically coming out and saying "Everyone who disagrees with me is immature and/or stupid" allowed now?
sid, I'm sorry if that is how you read my post. I'm certainly not at all trying to get people worked up over this and in no way was this a personal shot at you or anyone else. My point was simply that those who have blatantly called out the artist with no constructive criticism are just saying I don't like it because I want to pretend that bad things don't happen or they don't want to see it In "their" fantasy setting and that is not a valid reason IMHO to disregard the artistic skill involved in this diorama. I wouldn't know a thing about trolling. Lurking? Sure I've mastered that. But this is absolutely the only post I've called people out on and for what? Not providing good/adequate C & Cs? I'm to old to spend my time online pissing people off. I'm sorry that I offended you by liking something I found to be an edgy, different take on what we're used to. I certainly don't think that someone is wrong or immature just because they don't agree with me, but I think that if anyone is going to spend the time to tell the artist they don't like a piece of his work then they should be able to thoroughly express a valid reason for why they don't like it or give constructive criticism on how to improve it.
On that note, I'm unsubscribing from this thread tomorrow as I can already tell that voicing my opinion may have been a bad idea on this thread.
I apologize that anything I would post would garnish such backlash on dakka, that was never my intent. I thought there was a slight hint of humor in my original post that could lighten the mood here. Clearly I was wrong and apologize to the dakkites.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
I do believe that the creator, Nakatan, simply wanted to point out the worst of the worst in the year 40.000
Fair enough. Now what I want to know is why did it need to be pointed out?
If someone could just give me a good reason why this was a point that needed to be made I won't post about the diorama again.
And while you're at it, please explain the Lego concentration camp. Why did that need to be made?
16335
Post by: Witzkatz
On the pages before, someone pointed out that it might be the disbalance of power in this diorama that creates so many negative reactions, and I guess I'd agree on that. Second factor is probably and as already pointed out the closeness to reality.
For starters, this diorama is good in a way as it made me ponder the morality of Warhammer 40,000, like it happened to many other people here, I believe. We have don't object to millions dieing, but a case of possible rape repulses us? Where does this come from? And I guess it's about the disbalance of power, at least partially, connected with our sense of right and wrong, good and evil. . Consider the following scenes:
1. A Space Marine fighting a Chaos Space Marine, a moment frozen in time where none of them has the advantage.
This is a basic Wh40k scene. I'm quite sure nobody here is repulsed by it, really. However, the CSM is basically a psychopath fuelled by wrath, anger, hate and the pure lust in making other beings suffer - and he's obviously trying to do exactly that. Evil guy tries to harm good guy. (And let's assume that speciecist hardline warrior monks are the good guys here for the sake of the example.) However, we are not repulsed by it because we know the opponents in this battle are of roughly equal power. It's a classical struggle with angry warriors clashing swords and trying to overcome their adversary. Example is very far from reality, supersoldiers all the way.
2. A Space Marine chopping a cultists head off / a Vindicare assassin one-shotting an ork boy with his pistol at close distance. Brains flying around.
I would hazard that scenes like this generallly find the approval of the 40k community. The good guys, humanity, overcome and destroy their evil enemies. However, there's a serious power disbalance in both scenes, as we all can agree that cultists and basic ork boyz are no match for Marines or assassins. In this case most people will be okay with it though, because the good guys win. Anyone disagree? Sidenote: These scenes are very far from reality - aliens and supersoldiers. However, let's proceed to the next one:
3. A Khorne Berzerker rampaging through a squad of conscripts, disembowelled bodies in a wake behind him.
What do we have here? The power disbalance is obvious, even for someone who doesn't know the genre. In this way, it's like example 2. However, in this case, the evil murderer, the bloodthirsty sociopath who gains pleasure from taking the lives of innocent people, is the winner. Sounds like this scene is actually something repulsing, isn't it? However, let me again hazard that still quite a lot of people will be ok with this, probably for one reason: It's quite far away from reality, still. While the victims are humans, the foe is so over the top grimdark that it's easy to distance oneself from the scene.
4. A group of six men standing in a circle around a bloodied and beaten man, lying on the floor, trying to protect himself. The six men have iron pipes or bloodied knuckles.
Allright. Serious power disbalance here again, it's clear who the bad guys are and it's clear that the victim stands no chance. This resembles example 3, but with an important difference: This looks very real. Stuff like this could happen just a few blocks away from where you live. There are no grimdark warp gods, superhumans or violent green guys with cockney accents involved. And because of this, because one can so easily imagine this happening in real life, I'd guess many people would frown upon such a diorama. It's a helpless victim being attacked by a stronger evil that is getting its way with the victim, in a very real-life situation. I imagine this to be the non-sexual counterpart to the diorama discussed in this thread.
Anyone agree? Yes, no, maybe?
As a concluding example, let's think about this:
What if the author of Alien Contact would've depicted Slaaneshi daemons about to rape an ork boy? My estimate would be: You would still get voices saying "This is about rape, this is a topic not suitable for a children's game like 40k", but they would be far less frequent. By using aliens and daemons for the scene, the topic is distanced from reality and loses some of its repulsing effect. I guess there'd be at least some people with posts like "HAHA, look at that orks face, he knows he's in trouble!", taking the scene with the usual 40k tongue-in-cheek, something that does not happen with the Alien Contact diorama.
Be advised that I'm not taking sides right now and that I'm not saying anyone is wrong with their opinion. I'm just trying to explain reactions.
So, why did I write all this? I don't really know, I guess I like to think about things. Summarizing, I just tried to analyze what exactly made people be disgusted and repulsed by a diorama like this, when they are used to the 40k setting of blood, violence, hate and genocide. Disbalance of power, evil winning over good and the closeness to reality are my theses. What's your opinion?
18424
Post by: Imperial Monkey
Long and the short of it is, this diorama is brilliant, not just because it is well modelled. More over, it is not good art as such, it is more realistically reflecting the brutality and the horror of war in a hobby that attempts to glorify war and all it entails. Something that is wrong in itself. This is fantastic because it is so down to earth and realistic. No matter how shocking or wrong someone finds rape, because they don't like it doesn't mean it won't happen. The key part to it however is that it is the Guardsmen that are raping her. The imperial guard are portrayed by GW as the "good guys" in their overall glorification. It helps to remind us that all are guilty in wartime. No matter what side you are on. Just as the allies were guilty of atrocity's (not quite on the same scale as the holocaust, granted, but some allied soldiers will have raped as they advanced toward Berlin)in the 2nd world war, they were overlooked however due to the fact history is written by the victor (and for the life of me I cannot remember who said that). Imp. Monkey Automatically Appended Next Post: On a side note Witzkatz puts this bloody well actually, in a long winded way
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
I don't think GW glorifies war at all. If you really wanna argue that then anything war-related "glorifies" it apparently. Call of Duty games and damn near every FPS ever made for that matter, all tabletop wargames, etc.
Or you could stop taking gak so seriously, realize it's a game, and just play. If it really bothers you that much, if you really think it's "wrong", then why are you playing 40k at all?
30997
Post by: Sgt.Snail
Follow it up with another diorama of the guardsmen about to be hung by a commisar for their impure acts.It 'll give people a chance to moan more, or to see them get their just desserts.
18424
Post by: Imperial Monkey
I don't think its wrong, its fun and is just a game. It does however glorify war. It talks about millions dying and brushes it off as a fact. That is glorification. It is taking war and trivialising it, giving the idea that one beings life is worthless.
I don't take it too seriously and i play for enjoyment. But you have to keep things in reasonable perspective.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
OH and no, not everything war related trivialises it. That's the whole idea of films and books, they create the scene of war that should be shown. They demonstrate to people that would otherwise never see war as it is truly is. That it is not something to be glorified, but is just killing.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
I think the scene was well painted.
I also think the represented content was rendered into cheap titillation for adolescents instead of the real horror of gang rape.
I also think it has no place as a tabletop representation of a fantastical wargame.
What next for the artist? The atrocities of Nanking visually represented by Tau on Imperial citizenry?
The subject matter is not one for trivialisation via the medium of pulp sci-fi and the diorama is in poor taste.
You could have set it up with transformer toys or Barbie being raped by Buzz Lightyear and Woody and you'd have only marginally increased the trivialisation of the subject matter more.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Imperial Monkey wrote:I don't think its wrong, its fun and is just a game. It does however glorify war. It talks about millions dying and brushes it off as a fact. That is glorification. It is taking war and trivialising it, giving the idea that one beings life is worthless.
No, you very clearly said that the hobby attempted to glorify war, and that it was wrong. And now you're saying it's not wrong, 40k is just a game and it's meant to be fun, etc.
735
Post by: JOHIRA
Sidstyler wrote:If someone could just give me a good reason why this was a point that needed to be made I won't post about the diorama again.
And while you're at it, please explain the Lego concentration camp. Why did that need to be made?
You could ask the same question of not just every diorama that has ever been made, but every piece of art that has ever been made, and you will likely never get a satisfactory answer.
18424
Post by: Imperial Monkey
No, I said that the hobby glorifies war, and that aspect is wrong. I will admit that "attempts" was not the right word to use, my mistake. But i play the game for enjoyment and even though it glorifys war, which it does through the background, I still play because looking at it overall it is a harmless game for we nerds to enjoy. Probably the glorification that comes into it is not intended, but that is what happens.
16387
Post by: Manchu
The 40k fluff definitely glorifies war. I'd think it would be beyond dispute.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Manchu wrote:The 40k fluff definitely glorifies war. I'd think it would be beyond dispute.
And our Western culture does likewise, you can also buy toy guns and toy soldiers for children, you cannot buy rape dolls for them.
Comparing 'the horror of war/violence' with rape in this case and arguing that allowing one and not the other belies a hypocrisy may hold merit, but the hypocrisy is one held by the morality of our entire culture and one we all accept and live with, presumably as we're all here because we collect war toys.
16387
Post by: Manchu
Sure, sure. Violence is tolerated in the popular conscience as useful, necessary, even fun--because the the leaders of the state have a need for police and soldiers to coercively assert their authority. But no one chooses to play 40k or any other wargame because war and violence are socially tolerable. Similarly, no one plays 40k or engages in the modelling hobby in order to trivialize war. I think asserting otherwise is tissue-thin nonesense, the equivalent of North Korea charging that the US has children play Call of Duty to indoctrinate them as killers. In the case of this diorama, I don't think the artist set out to convince people that rape was okay or even that it is less serious than it's currently taken. I think the reason the piece works is becuase the viewer takes rape very seriously both before and after seeing it. Yes, there is an OTT quality about the piece which makes it identifiably 40k rather than something merely historical but I do not agree that the diorama is in poor taste.
16335
Post by: Witzkatz
MeanGreenStompa said:
You could have set it up with transformer toys or Barbie being raped by Buzz Lightyear and Woody and you'd have only marginally increased the trivialisation of the subject matter more.
I think this is really a bit harsh. While miniatures and miniature painting have not received the same status as an art medium as oil paintings, they are definitely far more usable and used for artistic purposes than your average Buzz Lightyear toy.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Space GI Joes all gathering around to rape a space elf lady.
That's the subject matter. It's a trivialisation. Given the very broad age range of gamers and painters of 40k and the active encouragement of younger gamers into the hobby, I am personally not amused at the use of these figures in this scene. If the painter had indeed used realistic pieces and recreated a photographed scene from Nanking or the Russian advance into Germany, painted with the obvious skill he or she possesses, then I'd have applauded it. But I cannot shake how this feels 'wrong' and that it is an intrusion of very serious subject matter into a pulp scifi setting. It can certainly be argued that such matter exists in the fiction written for the setting, but I feel that allusion remains a powerful mark of artistry and the thing could have been hinted at with far more subtly than 'oooh, space elf tits!'
It can certainly be argued that the sexual abuse of minors by members of the ecclesiarchy 'exists' in the vastness of of this fictional universe and you could go entirely over the top with the representation of a Slaaneshi renegade army's depredations on a civilian population and remain 'in fluff' and I still wouldn't want to see it and I'd still regard you oddly for making it in the first place.
34605
Post by: spireland
How about everyone who doesn't think this is offensive show it to their wives and ask them what they think.
221
Post by: Frazzled
spireland wrote:How about everyone who doesn't think this is offensive show it to their wives and ask them what they think.
Er...no. I don't need my wife giving me THE LOOK.
THE LOOK: So terrifying that even TBone the Terrible, 8lb weiner dog of rage, runs in fear*
*If by run we mean ambles over to the sofa and burrows under a blanket, shortly to start snoring later.
18176
Post by: Guitardian
Why did you pick Eldar as the violated Xenos and not Tyranids though? That would have been way more interesting. Actually all stupidness aside I think that is very good, and yeah, very disturbing, which is kind of what makes it good. It would have been sleazy or kinky if it was some Dark Eldar figs in place of IG, but as it is, it isn't like a wierd rape fantasy it's like a seriously yucky scenario. It reminds me of Vietnam war movies, or English soldiers in American Revolution movies (or rob roy, or braveheart, or really any of the 'English are evil' period films), or American Civil war atrocities versus blacks sort of scenes. Its yucky. Such an innocent sci-fi fantasy game can become so disturbing and brutal in a real way, its far more scary than a big throne made out of skulls or a bat-winged demon thing ripping the head off of an armored giant. This is like.. real.
16387
Post by: Manchu
@spireland: Frankly, mate, if I cared what the missus thought about my hobbies I wouldn't be on Dakka at all.
34605
Post by: spireland
Manchu wrote:@spireland: Frankly, mate, if I cared what the missus thought about my hobbies I wouldn't be on Dakka at all.
My point is that you have to look at how the model appears to others not just yourself. Put yourself in someone elses shoes (a females persepective) and how they would perceive it. This hobby does nothing to appeal to the female crowd as it is. Showing all female models as having their boobs spilling out of uniforms is bad enough, but this kind of thing is just bad taste.
If you wouldn't show this to your Mom, Wife, Daugther then you need to think about if its in bad taste.
16387
Post by: Manchu
With all respect to them, I'm not sure that my mother, (hypothetical) daughter, or wife has any capacity to judge the merits--whether technical, aesthetic, or moral--of a 40k miniatures diorama. Their opinions on the subject are not really pertinent in the same sense that my own opinion wouldn't be pertinent about something I had little to no interest in or understanding of. Although I will concede that it is possible, however overwhelmingly implausible, that this diorama could affect the demographics of who participates in the hobby, I don't believe that such consideration is material in any sense to what the hobbyist/artist chooses to produce. In fact, I think such consideration is inimical to the exercise of talent.
16335
Post by: Witzkatz
Yeah, I wouldn't promote the hobby of Wh40k with this diorama, I agree on that. I showed it to my exgirlfriend, and while she was not outraged or greatly repulsed, she stated that this is definitely worse than Khornates ripping people's heads off, because the scene doesn't show intent of killing, but intent of torturing and tormenting someone. (And I would agree that enjoying the pain and suffering of another sentient being can (!) be more abhorrent that just the wish to see something dead.)
Again, it's the realism that, I guess, makes this scene so intense and repulsing.
On a related note, I sometimes showed my mother some of my painted minis, just because she was interested. She enormously disliked my Imperial Guardsmen...defenders of mankind...while she was excited about Tyranids...the living horror that cares for nothing but consuming all life in the galaxy. Why? Because Tyranids are crazy space bugs and so far off reality that it's really just fantasy, a game. IG though? The Guard is so close to the armies, wars and war crimes of the 20th century and today, that scenes and stories about the Imperial Guard can be far less tongue-in-cheek than the rest of the over-the-top Warhammer Universe. Choosing IG for this diorama and not more crazy space thingies adds a lot to the impact of this scene.
I'm still not sold about if I like this diorama or not. I definitely see arguments for and against it.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Manchu wrote:With all respect to them, I'm not sure that my mother, (hypothetical) daughter, or wife has any capacity to judge the merits--whether technical, aesthetic, or moral--of a 40k miniatures diorama.
And you do? What art school for miniatures did you graduate from again?
855
Post by: grotblaster
I don't go out of my way to show any of my plastic "dolls" as my wife calls them, to my wife or mom.
I also certainly don't go out of my way to show anything even remotely sexual to my mother or daughter. I don't think that reflects poorly on the material necessarily.
Whether a certain medium is art or not is a question of eternal debate and is most certainly an individual decision.
The Rape of Lucretia and other classic artworks have also addressed the subject matter without the artists being condemned as perverts (at least not by most people).
34605
Post by: spireland
Manchu wrote:With all respect to them, I'm not sure that my mother, (hypothetical) daughter, or wife has any capacity to judge the merits--whether technical, aesthetic, or moral--of a 40k miniatures diorama. Their opinions on the subject are not really pertinent in the same sense that my own opinion wouldn't be pertinent about something I had little to no interest in or understanding of. Although I will concede that it is possible, however overwhelmingly implausible, that this diorama could affect the demographics of who participates in the hobby, I don't believe that such consideration is material in any sense to what the hobbyist/artist chooses to produce. In fact, I think such consideration is inimical to the exercise of talent.
If we are judging this model only on it's aestic qualities then I would agree with your above statement. But we are not. They can judge it on it's moral implications based on the fact that they are alive and have opinions. I was trying to make the point that if you have reservations of sharing this picture with them then maybe it is offensive. Would you have an issue showing any other models to females?
This model is patently offensive to most members of the opposite sex, and should be so to all. The OP is trying to get a reaction out of people by this model. Is this the reaction that we as 40k players want? Do you want people to think of 40k as the kind of hobby where a model represents rape and everyone just comments about how the blending has been done really well?
16387
Post by: Manchu
Frazzled wrote:And you do? What art school for miniatures did you graduate from again?
The same one you did; in other words, actually caring about and participating in the hobby.
16335
Post by: Witzkatz
@spireland: So, do you think the oil paintings mentioned and shown before in this thread are also (and meant to be) offensive to women? Or is it just the medium of miniatures that makes it so?
And, while I understand that you're thinking about which effect this diorama might have on non-40k players and their opinion about the hobby, I wouldn't necessarily agree that this should prohibit a 40k player from commending the author on his work. Not everything has to be politically correct 100% to be good. I guess you also wouldn't show Khorne daemons standing over the freshly cleaved skulls of 43 guardsmen to your mother to "promote" the hobby, aye?
16387
Post by: Manchu
spireland wrote:They can judge it on it's moral implications based on the fact that they are alive and have opinions.
The notion that a pulse is the only requirement for having worthwile views on morality is a problem far beyond the scope of this thread.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Manchu wrote:Frazzled wrote:And you do? What art school for miniatures did you graduate from again?
The same one you did; in other words, actually caring about and participating in the hobby.
See that wouldn't work on my end as She Who Must Be Obeyed comes from an arty family that actually went to art school/does art for a living (not her). My toy soldiers aren't viewed as real art by them. The laughter I'd get if I showed that to them would not be good.
21150
Post by: FerrumIgnatus
Well.. I did it.. I took the dreaded task of showing this diorama to my fiancé, gave her a quick walkthrough of 6 pages of what the fuzz is all about, where as she gave me the "One heaved eyebrow" look and asked "That's it? You guys fretting about the morality and whatnot about a plastic toy diorama that is supposed to have "Rape" as a subject? Seriously, you guys need to harden up. Show me a diorama of a REAL rape in progress, THEN we can talk."
There you have it.. even girls aren't offended by the diorama. And I'm slightly awestruck by the response of my soon to be wife.. didn't see that one coming, to be honest..
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Manchu wrote:The 40k fluff definitely glorifies war. I'd think it would be beyond dispute.
Manchu wrote:@spireland: Frankly, mate, if I cared what the missus thought about my hobbies I wouldn't be on Dakka at all.
Manchu wrote:spireland wrote:They can judge it on it's moral implications based on the fact that they are alive and have opinions.
The notion that a pulse is the only requirement for having worthwile views on morality is a problem far beyond the scope of this thread.
This is some brilliant posting right here. QFT.
________________________________________________________________________________________
OT:
I think the fact that this diorama has caused this much debate makes it officially successful as art. This hobby is enjoyed by people of all ages, so I don't see why someone should have to limit their painting and modeling to a PG-13 if they don't want to.
I still don't see how the scene depicted this is worse than working the population of Armageddon to death, and why there isn't outcry about myriad other things that are at least as bad the possible rape of Eldar.
34605
Post by: spireland
Manchu wrote:spireland wrote:They can judge it on it's moral implications based on the fact that they are alive and have opinions.
The notion that a pulse is the only requirement for having worthwile views on morality is a problem far beyond the scope of this thread.
My point was that being a member of the female sex allows them to have an opinion. I'll bite, what would allow them to judge it's moral implications?
35973
Post by: Gibbsey
spireland wrote:Manchu wrote:spireland wrote:They can judge it on it's moral implications based on the fact that they are alive and have opinions.
The notion that a pulse is the only requirement for having worthwile views on morality is a problem far beyond the scope of this thread.
My point was that being a member of the female sex allows them to have an opinion. I'll bite, what would allow them to judge it's moral implications?
Huh? So because im male i cant have an opinion? also I beleive "The notion that a pulse is the only requirement for having worthwile views on morality is a problem far beyond the scope of this thread" is refering to a philosophical debate.
So You can either argue that depicting this is bad in all art forms, or that 40k dioramas are not art.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Or option C: I can argue both.
35973
Post by: Gibbsey
Frazzled wrote:Or option C: I can argue both.
True both of which are completely subjective arguments......
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Not really.
There's plenty of classic pieces of art on the subject matter in question. To say that it has no place in art is flatly wrong.
35973
Post by: Gibbsey
Monster Rain wrote:Not really.
There's plenty of classic pieces of art on the subject matter in question. To say that it has no place in art is flatly wrong.
Subjective as in personal opinion, but i agree with you.
14074
Post by: Mastiff
I'm not comfortable with the subject matter, but I'm not going to moralize here. But the piece is very successful in telling a story, which is the hallmark of an successful diorama IMHO. The technical painting is incredible as well. Colour is used well to make her the focal point of the piece.
I don't think it celebrates what is about to happen, and does a good job of making the viewer face some unpleasant concepts of war, and why it shouldn't be celebrated. I think that's a good thing, even if I don't agree with everyone's conclusions.
10127
Post by: Happygrunt
Gentlemen, we play with toy soldiers. And were are trying to depict war. War isn't all about killing. Its the lowest humanity can get. I like the diorama, as I have said, because its not the normal fighting and gunfire. Its something different. An enemy combatant has been captured. What do you do with said enemy? My 2 cents, that this is war, and war is hell. The diorama depicts that well.
16387
Post by: Manchu
Gibbsey's on the money. Without getting into that debate: People have all sorts of opinions and few seem shy about airing them. It's up to you to decide whose opinion you value regarding what subjects. As for me: I'm simply not interested in what non-hobbyists think of the merits of this piece (even if they're female) and I don't think that the opinions of non-hobbyists should have much if any influence on what a hobbyist decides to portray. To put a fine point on it, I don't think we should only model what will make 40k sell better to a wider audience.
37382
Post by: Mit Gas
A daring piece that might've worked better with showing less of her boobs (like a smaller hole in her chest that shows just a tiny bit of skin instead of blantantly showing those rather huge melons for an eldar) but still, despite this little criticism (I'm a "less is more" guy) from my way, this is completely astounding. The paintjobs are great - some of the expressions are simply perfect. And the idea, to show what would happen if 40k was more akin to real life, is a glorious and artistic one. I like it very much and I'm usually not into nudity on minis (not as long as there are sexy photos and porn as an alternative at least, lol). Great job!
33891
Post by: Grakmar
Mit Gas wrote:A daring piece that might've worked better with showing less of her boobs (like a smaller hole in her chest that shows just a tiny bit of skin instead of blantantly showing those rather huge melons for an eldar) but still, despite this little criticism (I'm a "less is more" guy) from my way, this is completely astounding. The paintjobs are great - some of the expressions are simply perfect. And the idea, to show what would happen if 40k was more akin to real life, is a glorious and artistic one. I like it very much and I'm usually not into nudity on minis (not as long as there are sexy photos and porn as an alternative at least, lol). Great job!
I'm not sure how I feel about the exposed breast.
On one hand, it is a little graphic and overdone. It seems to make the piece more "sexy" and less "horrifying". With it, the piece ventures into the porn side of things.
On the other hand, it is a intentionally graphic and adds to the shock value of the piece. It guarantees the viewer understands what is going on and what the intention of the soldiers is. Without it, the piece looses some of it's edginess.
37382
Post by: Mit Gas
Grakmar wrote:Mit Gas wrote:A daring piece that might've worked better with showing less of her boobs (like a smaller hole in her chest that shows just a tiny bit of skin instead of blantantly showing those rather huge melons for an eldar) but still, despite this little criticism (I'm a "less is more" guy) from my way, this is completely astounding. The paintjobs are great - some of the expressions are simply perfect. And the idea, to show what would happen if 40k was more akin to real life, is a glorious and artistic one. I like it very much and I'm usually not into nudity on minis (not as long as there are sexy photos and porn as an alternative at least, lol). Great job!
I'm not sure how I feel about the exposed breast.
On one hand, it is a little graphic and overdone. It seems to make the piece more "sexy" and less "horrifying". With it, the piece ventures into the porn side of things.
On the other hand, it is a intentionally graphic and adds to the shock value of the piece. It guarantees the viewer understands what is going on and what the intention of the soldiers is. Without it, the piece looses some of it's edginess.
I can totally see your point here. I guess it's down to personal preference but I'm not sure if it isn't even more awesome if you had to look at it twice before you understood "the big picture" cause that would make it even more twisted. Either way, it's a great littleproject that nicely showcases great skill and a very interesting take on 40k.
36693
Post by: bluedestiny
Now I've just shown the diorama to my wife, she finds it funny... and it wasn't "rape" that first comes to mind. I personally have no problem with the display from the OP, I think he has lots of talent, i've seen alot more modelling diorama which will make this one look like a fluffy bunny, and those are weird..... damn Japanese hobby conventions.
Also at the end of the day it's little toy soldiers which you play with or model, so why should be get offended and saying things about how it's morally wrong blah blah blah. Now if OP's piece is offensive and such how about this??? (I apologies to the mods if this is not really appropriate and feel free to remove.)
Warning Adult theme
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
MeanGreenStompa wrote:It can certainly be argued that such matter exists in the fiction written for the setting, but I feel that allusion remains a powerful mark of artistry and the thing could have been hinted at with far more subtly than 'oooh, space elf tits!'
I agree wholeheartedly, and I can think of something right off the top of my head that would have been a much better diorama, but much less "interesting" I guess since it wouldn't have tits in it just for the sake of tits.
You could have simply had the Eldar woman fully armored, maybe with her helmet broken or something to reveal her face if you were concerned about people "not knowing" she was female (as if the breastplate with breasts on it wouldn't have given it away) and the men just standing around her, giving each other the same looks. The tank driver is still watching, the knife is still laying next to her, the guy would have still had his lasgun and had it pointed at her "just in case"...get rid of the guy about to drop his pants, too, and I think this would have made for a much more meaningful diorama, because your mind doesn't immediately jump to rape, although it's still possible and in the back of your mind while looking at it. That would have been fething brilliant.
But no, we get this instead. Complete with a Guardsmen getting ready to whip his junk out in front of us.
See, it's not really the implication of rape that's distasteful, it's just the way you went about portraying this scene in my opinion. I think that's what bothers me the most about it, I just feel like I'm being hit over the head with a 2x4 that says "THIS IS A RAPE SCENE!". Make sense?
FerrumIgnatus wrote:There you have it.. even girls aren't offended by the diorama.
...um...dude? You showed one woman, that HARDLY gives you the right to make such a bold statement like "Even girls aren't offended by it, I have proof! Matter settled!"
Not to say it isn't nice to see what her opinion on it was, but one woman's opinion hardly means the matter is dead and done with. Would you agree if a woman went outside, found one donkey-cave guy, and forever used that as proof that all men are sexist pigs who objectify women?
Gibbsy wrote:Huh? So because im male i cant have an opinion?
That's one HELL of an assumption there, buddy*. Saying that women have the right to an opinion doesn't take away the right from men...
bluedestiny wrote:Now I've just shown the diorama to my wife, she finds it funny... and it wasn't "rape" that first comes to mind.
How can it NOT be the first thing that comes to mind? She did actually look at it, right?
She probably just found it "funny" because it's a serious scene someone modeled with what she views as toys. In her mind it's probably the same thing as using Legos or GI Joes to depict "the horror of war". So in my opinion that's not exactly an argument for the piece.
*Body? Jesus I can't type.
9370
Post by: Accolade
bluedestiny wrote:Now I've just shown the diorama to my wife, she finds it funny... and it wasn't "rape" that first comes to mind. I personally have no problem with the display from the OP, I think he has lots of talent, i've seen alot more modelling diorama which will make this one look like a fluffy bunny, and those are weird..... damn Japanese hobby conventions.
Also at the end of the day it's little toy soldiers which you play with or model, so why should be get offended and saying things about how it's morally wrong blah blah blah. Now if OP's piece is offensive and such how about this??? (I apologies to the mods if this is not really appropriate and feel free to remove.)
Warning Adult theme
There was an equally long conversation about that model, I'll just link it for everyone's reference:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/328300.page
No real need to get back into that conversation, it played out as far as it had to go.
35973
Post by: Gibbsey
Sidstyler wrote:MeanGreenStompa wrote:It can certainly be argued that such matter exists in the fiction written for the setting, but I feel that allusion remains a powerful mark of artistry and the thing could have been hinted at with far more subtly than 'oooh, space elf tits!'
I agree wholeheartedly, and I can think of something right off the top of my head that would have been a much better diorama, but much less "interesting" I guess since it wouldn't have tits in it just for the sake of tits.
You could have simply had the Eldar woman fully armored, maybe with her helmet broken or something to reveal her face if you were concerned about people "not knowing" she was female (as if the breastplate with breasts on it wouldn't have given it away) and the men just standing around her, giving each other the same looks. The tank driver is still watching, the knife is still laying next to her, the guy would have still had his lasgun and had it pointed at her "just in case"...get rid of the guy about to drop his pants, too, and I think this would have made for a much more meaningful diorama, because your mind doesn't immediately jump to rape, although it's still possible and in the back of your mind while looking at it. That would have been fething brilliant.
But no, we get this instead. Complete with a Guardsmen getting ready to whip his junk out in front of us.
See, it's not really the implication of rape that's distasteful, it's just the way you went about portraying this scene in my opinion. I think that's what bothers me the most about it, I just feel like I'm being hit over the head with a 2x4 that says "THIS IS A RAPE SCENE!". Make sense?
FerrumIgnatus wrote:There you have it.. even girls aren't offended by the diorama.
...um...dude? You showed one woman, that HARDLY gives you the right to make such a bold statement like "Even girls aren't offended by it, I have proof! Matter settled!"
Not to say it isn't nice to see what her opinion on it was, but one woman's opinion hardly means the matter is dead and done with. Would you agree if a woman went outside, found one donkey-cave guy, and forever used that as proof that all men are sexist pigs who objectify women?
Gibbsy wrote:Huh? So because im male i cant have an opinion?
That's one HELL of an assumption there, body. Saying that women have the right to an opinion doesn't take away the right from men...
So your point is this is wrong because it implies it to heavily?
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
You quoted my whole post for one sentence?
But to put it simply, yeah. I don't think this is necessarily "wrong", I just think it would have been better if it didn't feel like I was being beat over the head with the Obvious Stick. With a few "minor" differences, but otherwise* keeping the entire scene the same, I'd have been a lot more fond of it than I am.
*God wtf I oaigejaligm
32111
Post by: massey
I like it. It's definitely art, as this has generated a lot more discussion than the standard "oh, I see a mold line there" that CMON normally has.
My only critique on the technical side is that her torn breastplate looks wrong somehow. As in, I don't think it comes off that way. I'm not sure how Eldar armor disassembles, but I don't think it would look quite like that. I think the armor is one piece all the way up to the neck, so that part should be exposed as well. I also agree that she should probably have some sort of torn undershirt on.
As far as the depiction of rape, maybe it's because I discovered 40K in college, but I always assumed this was part of war in the Imperium. It's been a part of every war in history, why would it change in the future? I like this piece because it humanizes everything. This isn't just some 5 point Imperial Guardsmen versus an 8 point Guardian. It's not just a handful of men out of countless trillions. These are actual characters. For the first time, a 40K diorama made me think about these as real people. You might even like these guys if you met them in a bar after the battle. This reminds me of Band of Brothers, where even the "good" guys are doing horrible things. Apocalypse Now isn't a happy movie, and it doesn't make you feel good about US involvement in 'Nam, but it's art.
I see some justifications from people in this thread, and I think that is just an attempt to avoid the ultimate consequences of the piece. Despite the vaunted reflexes of the Eldar, I don't think that knife is going to do her any good. And based on her expression, I think she knows it too. And I don't think a Commissar is going to come along and execute them. I think they're going to get away with it. And that's what gives the piece its emotional impact. (Personally, I think such an act would generally get the Commissar's approval, as long as you shoot her afterwards).
Why aren't they raping a Tyranid? Because no one cares if you rape a Tyranid. For the same reason that a diorama of several horrified people crouching against a pile of rubble, staring at a Slaanesh marine with his back to the viewer and tentacles coming out of where his crotch would be wouldn't carry the same impact. Something like that would cheapen the message, turn it into a joke. This is close enough to reality to make us cringe, and that's why it's effective.
Art goes to places that make us uncomfortable. I saw When the Wind Blows when I was 8 or 9, and I think about it whenever people talk about Exterminatus being used. It's the story of a nice elderly couple who slowly die of radiation poisoning after a nuclear attack. It's grim and depressing and it's available on YouTube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EbsrJuAoQo I've also been to the Holocaust museum in DC, and I'm reminded of it when people talk about Imperial concentration camps. Our hobby references some incredibly dark and upsetting things, and people talk about it like it's no big deal. I'm not saying that we should all sit around and mope about how horrible everything is, it's perfectly fine to just sit back and enjoy your marine shooting a space monster. But it's also not an awful thing to look at it from a different perspective every once in a while, one that drives home the horror of war. And I think this diorama does that very well.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
I don't like the constant assumptions made in this thread that people aren't ever thinking about it. Just because there isn't a diorama dedicated to genocide or torture every week, or several multi-page philosophical discussions about those things on forums, doesn't mean everyone just ignores it.
Our hobby references some incredibly dark and upsetting things, and people talk about it like it's no big deal. I'm not saying that we should all sit around and mope about how horrible everything is, it's perfectly fine to just sit back and enjoy your marine shooting a space monster.
Well, apparently that is what you're saying, because if you "sit back and enjoy" then you get accused of talking about it like it's "no big deal". We do need to mope about it all the time or else people will misinterpret our having fun as not giving a gak about the horror of war.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Sidstyler wrote:Well, apparently that is what you're saying, because if you "sit back and enjoy" then you get accused of talking about it like it's "no big deal". We do need to mope about it all the time or else people will misinterpret our having fun as not giving a gak about the horror of war.
Not really, no.
The point is that it is silly to get all mad about one aspect of war when you blithely ignore other things that are equally as bad, that's all. It's either all serious or none of it is.
16387
Post by: Manchu
Or, to paraphrase Frazzled, it's both. Automatically Appended Next Post: Monster Rain wrote:it is silly to get all mad about one aspect of war when you blithely ignore other things that are equally as bad
Exactamundo. Rape is not a "privileged" form of violence; it's not out-of-bounds for discussion or even OTT portrayal. Witzkatz's theory of positively correlating realism to revulsion does not stop working for genocide or murder or torture unless you are somehow convinced that those things are less real than rape. Some people have said "well, this rape situation could happen close to where you live." So could torture and murder. And if you've bothered to watch the news over the last decades, you'll notice that genocide is not some relic of ages past, either. Automatically Appended Next Post: massey wrote:Why aren't they raping a Tyranid? Because no one cares if you rape a Tyranid.
I wonder what Ordo PETA would say about that. In all seriousness, you make some good points massey.
32111
Post by: massey
Sidstyler wrote:I don't like the constant assumptions made in this thread that people aren't ever thinking about it. Just because there isn't a diorama dedicated to genocide or torture every week, or several multi-page philosophical discussions about those things on forums, doesn't mean everyone just ignores it.
Our hobby references some incredibly dark and upsetting things, and people talk about it like it's no big deal. I'm not saying that we should all sit around and mope about how horrible everything is, it's perfectly fine to just sit back and enjoy your marine shooting a space monster.
Well, apparently that is what you're saying, because if you "sit back and enjoy" then you get accused of talking about it like it's "no big deal". We do need to mope about it all the time or else people will misinterpret our having fun as not giving a gak about the horror of war.
Do whatever the hell you want in your own hobby. If you prefer to think of 40K as a big violent Saturday morning cartoon, where Abaddon is basically the Skeletor/Hordak analog, then go ahead. Seriously, it's okay. That's the way I envision it half the time. If you prefer to think of Space Marines as more realistic future soldiers, where power weapons are really some sort of energized shank instead of a big huge sword, and they use lots of real tactics instead of just charging forward heroically, that's okay too. If you want your Imperial Guardsmen to just be faceless mooks that get cut down like they're fighting Arnold Schwarzenegger, that's fine.
It's your hobby. Do with it what you want. You don't have to take it seriously. I sure don't. I can't see an Ork gargant without thinking about the Technodrome from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. It's grimdark. It's satire. The villains come from heavy metal album covers and cartoons. So it can be whatever you want it to be. I also understand that there's a lot of really bad stuff in war that the game doesn't dwell on, despite its over the top dark nature.
You don't like the rape depiction? That's fine. You don't want it in your 40K? That's fine. If I had a 12 year old son, I certainly wouldn't want him playing a game where that was a part of it. That's not for 12 year olds. But I'm 32. I can appreciate what the OP was trying to do. You don't have to like art to appreciate it. In 1988, Alan Moore wrote a graphic novel called "The Killing Joke". In it, the Joker shoots Batgirl and paralyzes her. He then takes naked pictures of her. Some interpret it that he also rapes her, though it's not definitively stated. I don't like it. I don't like my superheroes being dirtied up that way. Supervillains shouldn't rape the hero's sidekick. That's not how I like my comic book characters. But I can't deny that it's art.
34841
Post by: MudgeBlack
Hi All,
This is Mrs. MudgeBlack stepping in for a wee bit of opinion sharing. I will start off with...I do not play Warhammer, WarMachine or any of the "nerd games" (as I call them) oh stop your gasping...it's true...there are humans outside the world of Warhammer... ;-P Now...for this scene...Dear Hubby was very interested to show me this to get my viewpoint and to see what I thought of the scene/artwork/etc without any background or hint to the controversy at hand. Here's what I see...(keep in mind I know very little other than the crazed ramblings about this faction and that...)
I see an amazingly well executed paint and modeling job. I see a scene with some humanoid type soldiers...(Imperial Guard??) that have disabled an Eldar craft and captured one of it's occupants. I see a really pissed off Eldar with a knife within reach...and I see 5 Imperial Guard guys about to get their asses handed to them in a very big way.
Why do I see it that way? Well...what I have been told of the Eldar is that they have speed and ferocity greater to that of the Imperial Guard. She's clearly pissed off...her expression (which I have to say is superbly painted) is not fear, it is anger and plotting. She is calculating which of the Guard Guys to mangle and disable first. Clearly the Guard with the gun must go first...a bit of mud to the face will surely shock and delay any fire power he might hold. The Guard holding the armor breastplate is clearly too fascinated that he has just exposed Eldar boobs to be of any immediate threat. The guard behind her that thinks he is about to have a moment at her expense will be the first to feel the wrath of the Eldar scorned. The knife should take him out tut suite. The voyeur in the tank looking thing...he's a coward and he will run for his miserable little life...the other guard with the gun will more than likely respect the "laws of war" and honour that she has disabled 3 of his men and earned her freedom. The "booby trapped" guard will come to his senses try to make a run and be dispatched in some manner by her and her breastplate returned. She and the honorable gunman will exchange a nod and she will be on her merry way. That's what I see.
Not for one moment in viewing the scene did it come to mind that this is depicting a rape scene. Would I show this to my kids? damn skippy I would...there's nothing here that I think would harm their little minds. I am not a soldier myself, nor is dear Mudge...however, I have had soldiers within my family and they do not romanticize war in the least. Sure there are plenty of honorable soldiers in the world, I do not wish to take that from any of them at all. However, there are scumbags within the world of war that may choose to take advantage of a situation such as this.
btw...The painting and modeling is amazing!
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
oh stop your gasping...it's true...there are humans outside the world of Warhammer... ;-P
...and I'm officially done with this thread. I can't say any more without breaking Rule #1, so feth it.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
I have to agree with you, Sid.
Lotta flame bait right there.
18176
Post by: Guitardian
Frazzled wrote:Manchu wrote:Frazzled wrote:And you do? What art school for miniatures did you graduate from again?
The same one you did; in other words, actually caring about and participating in the hobby.
See that wouldn't work on my end as She Who Must Be Obeyed comes from an arty family that actually went to art school/does art for a living (not her). My toy soldiers aren't viewed as real art by them. The laughter I'd get if I showed that to them would not be good.
Cheer up man. They went to art school. So maybe they can laugh at your toy soldiers but you can laugh at their 'education' in response. Remember, Artists don't go to school for it, only artists do that.
I do think this could be 'art' in the same way that some comic books kind of stand out as such. It isn't high art like some kind of rennaissance masterpiece, but it definitely challenges the viewer a lot more on a moral and aesthetic level than having a well painted blended fade-down wash on a multi-hues rainbow sword blade on a figure with a pile of 100 individualy painted and shaded skulls at its feet etc etc. The diorama is creepy, the dorky demon guy alternative is just juvenile stereotypical fantasy imagery painted well. Painting well is not necessarily artistic, it is skillful. Possibly the most disturbing scene I have seen in any 40k pictures or modelling, because it is ugly realistic. I can watch giant bugs hacking people in half and demons chewing on intestines and heads exploding all day and not be the slightest bit disgusted because it is silly juvenile fantasy. This scene is actually really fethed up, which is what makes it good in my opinion.
Its about time the 'GRIM' part got actually GRIM, because for the most part, we get plenty of darkness and plenty of war, but the 'grim' is not nearly so blatant.
171
Post by: Lorek
What a lovely thread. Pity that it really, really needs to be locked.
|
|
