Drawings About Love

In love… and then, taking each other along the path, not knowing where it will go. Full of excitement and fears, are we going to grow or stagnate? Want to raise ourselves to the next level? Or will we make everything worse? What do we make of our lives? Who are we actually? What moves us, what attracts us,  are we suitable, what are we doing  to each other? How difficult it is. Was everything an illusion?

Shiva wears an outfit of mine

Shiva is the destroyer who ends the cycle of time, which in turn begins a new creation. With Parvati, Shiva had a son, the god Ganesha. The boy was in fact created from earth and clay to keep her company and protect her while Shiva went on his meditative wanderings.   

Shiva's explanation is very similar to that of the Rune Berkana, she represents mother earth (and therefore all other earth and moon fertility goddesses). Berkana comes from the birch, the tree that reflects the moonlight at night - the light in the dark. She resembles the letter B, this shape is like a bosom - gives life in the form of milk. The story of Berkana as the giver of life but at the same time the destroyer is very similar to the explanation of the God Shiva... 

I really enjoy discovering these kinds of synchronicities.

Venus of Willendorf wears my outfits

The first drawing is a jacket with blood vessels and veins, and is therefore representative of our common ancestor. It is her blood that flows in our veins. If we were to realize this more consciously, the people of the world would not be so fragmented from each other. 

In the second drawing, Venus wears an outfit based on the theme of Fibonacci, and in particular how it unfolds in the growth of plants such as cacti or pineapple.

This fertility Venus goddess is a little statue from 11.1 cm tall and is dated between 24,000 and 22,000 BC. It was made in the Upper Paleolithic and was cut from oolitic limestone not found in the area. It is colored with red ocher.

Very little is known about its origins, how it was made, or its cultural significance. The image is not a realistic portrait, but an idealization of femininity. All female sexual characteristics are exaggerated as fertility symbols, such as the full breasts, large belly, mons pubis, thighs and buttocks. A heavily pregnant woman may be depicted.

The other body parts are less developed. The face is missing and the feet are very small. The arms are folded and barely visible. The head appears to have thick coils of hair, perhaps braids. The statue cannot stand on its feet and therefore would probably have been held for viewing. An American researcher, LeRoy McDermott, argued in 1996 on the basis of photographic material that it was a "personal perspective", seen from the point of view of the (pregnant) maker herself. According to him, that explains the proportions.

Bron: Wikipedia

Drawings from my sketchbook