no, really
only a couple of things give it away - the lips, and some of the dimples and folds around one of the hands aren't quite right. also, the other hand is in a real but not sustainable pose, so it looks a little wrong in many poses.
but the skin... bloody hell. holy jeebus, that's talent.
I find the 'reborn' stuff alternates between touching, astounding, and bit freaky.
but, wow.
also: wow.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
not a real baby
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
oh my freaking god. that's a wee bit too disturbing for my tastes.
Yes the artistry is amazing but eeeeewwwwww.
It's baby versions of the RealDolls freaks http://www.realdoll.com/
icky icky icky
but really amazing artistry though
How about wrong wrong wrong! Is it meant for people who have lost their baby?
That was one of my interpretations as well. In which case it's still a bit wrong. I really can't imagine having a delightful life size real feel image of your dead baby is actually going to help you move on or grieve properly.
I have noooo idea what they're for. it's very American, it's very strange. I do find them touching in a way, but it's well outweighed by the freakiness.
imagine if that artistic talent was used for good, not ev- well, it's not evil. but it is spooooooky...
Bugger me!
I'm really not sure quite what to say...
Ummm...at least it's better than the simulation baby we had at our pre-natal class.
But it's still just that wee bit freaky. If I came home and found one of those in my mum's dolls cabinet, I don't think I'd ever go back to visit again. Ever.
so if uit was carefully tucked into a cot, would that be better? or just disturbing in a different way? ;)
btw Wenchy, your new gravatar is freakin' me out! spookiness!
If I found one of those tucked in a cot I would run screaming. That or desperately try infant resucitation.
yep. back away and nuke them from orbit. it's the only way to be sure.
And do not stop resucitation to go and have a smoke. K?
(this made me very sad)
deeply freaky as was the whole sorry failed CPR story... I have given up watching news on principle. It's just too depressing and awful.
ah f@ck me, I just knew I shouldn't have read that article. I knew it. now I'm in the sh!ttiest mood, because it was even worse than I thought it would be.
f@cking put her in gaol and throw away the key.
do we have any oubliettes in Australia? because people like that bloody well deserve them. most of the time I think everyone deserves a) a chance at redemption or b) a second chance in general, but screw that.
Flaming Rattle of Righteousness, do your work.
Mr C told me about the article and I thought "Well, maybe he's better off dead." Harsh? Maybe, but the reality is harsh. Mr C returned with "Maybe if he'd been found a loving family, he might have had a better chance?" A better alternative to death, for sure! Poor little mite, really didn't have a chance from the word go.
Fuck up your own body and brain, if you really must, but don't force that onto someone who dosen't get a say. I have such a huge problem with drug addicts reproducing. It's just not fair. Sure, if they clean themselves up and get on with life, then they deserve that chance, but not when they are still pumping whatever shit they are using into their body and subsequently into something so defenceless!
I'm such a softy, I actually cried when I read that article. I wasn't sure whether to talk about it here or not. Perhaps it might have been better if I'd left it alone.
Sorry everybody.
Wenchy, you're prollt the same as me, having a cry whilst unsheathing the Flaming Rattle.
nah, post things like that, and don't kick yourself for it! it happened, it was real, and if it makes anyone who reads it think to take even more care of the children they already love, then it's been worth it. reflection and re-enforcement of our own behaviours is sometimes good.
and it also makes you want to kick DOCS/YACS/FACS in the pants, too, because I'm sick of the way they allow parents who can't take care of *themselves* to be responsible for children. they have some work to do.
that's 'prolly' not 'prollt'
Post a Comment