Self Portrait with fist in Freshwater Clearcut

If clearcuts are going to be the medium for such photos then perhaps they should be banned. What the hell are you thinking?

The horror.

The horror.

Do you think clearcuts should be banned? Or do you think images drawing attention to the rape of our forests' should be banned? I believe clearcuts must be banned and without the help of Artists, Activists, and all other concerned citizens this goal will never be reached.
-WRP

Okay, well I disagree with your view on forest logging, but the self-portrait is fairly well-done.

First reaction--hey pretty good-I wonder if it's digitally drawn.
Strong points--the motion blur of movement. Not enough of that in art, I think. The limiting of hues. The composition is fairly clear and works all right. Parts of the body pose seem a bit stiff as opposed to tensing in action.
Weak points--I don't think all the elements of the piece really explain your beef. At first I thought it was just someone angry at something, kneeling on a stump in their backyard. You might consider some changes to make your meaning clearer.

As for the political point of view. Well I certainly don't view the cutting of trees as any kind of a rape. I do think clearcutting whole forests uncontrolled is obviously a self-damning course of action. Uncontrolled at this point in history, such logging methods would certainly bite the collective nation in the rear very shortly. I can't comment more on the subject since all I know is that the logging industry is at least partially limited in their actions--like the strip-miners of a few decades ago, they've had to change methods as our collective national environmental consciousness becomes aware of the self-damning problems of ignoring nature.

If the photo was decrying the rape of forests, you would think the model would be bent over the stump.