Okay, Okay, now before you go making an artistic critique, let me just say that this is meant to be more symbolic than aesthetically pleasing, and that this is in no way typical of my usual style. My other stuff is usually much different... just so you know.
I got the idea when I was studying for my biology lab practical. I had been throwing around extravagant -and might I add, pretty awesome- ideas for this project, but I honestly didn't have the time to commit to a 14+ hour work and wanted to do something a little deeper than political cartoons. So as I was reviewing the hominid lineage for my exam, and got to thinking that all of these "in between" steps really muddy the water, so to speak, when it comes to drawing the line between humans and animals. When did this animal actually become human enough to be considered human? Was it when Homo erectus began walking upright? Was it when Neanderthal began to communicate through rough "speech?" Or was it when Australopiticus began to favor a larger brain? Looking at these skulls made me wonder how we can try to draw a definitive line when there are just so many similarities and when the transition from apelike animals to Homo sapiens was a very gradual one. And then, what if we weren't the only surviving species in the genus Homo? If we had contemporaries like Homo habilus and Homo erectus, how would we label them? The arbitrarty lines that humans like to draw are truly that: arbitrary.
Penny!
ReplyDeleteI think this is a very unique and interesting prospective! Nice job!
I like the biology. ha. Few people are exposed to the human ancestry line. Often times, when people hear about evolutionary biology, they think humans are derived from monkey, so they just throw the whole science out the door. The actuality involves a common ancestor, like you have shown, Nice! :)
ReplyDelete