That's art! On first sight it reminded me of Salvador Dalì's Hummer-Phone. Do you know it?
But your drawing seems to have a even deeper philosophy.
Simply great!

Hummer-Phone? I can't say I have. Do you have a picture or a link I could go to? I do know of the Lobster Phone, though. Dali scared me as a child, but got more interesting as I got older (and crazier, haha).

Thank you, for the words and the Favourite, and the Watch (omg). Much appreciated. ^_^

Form follow function - Louis Sullivan

After reading the sociolgical studies of Hall and Grossberg I believe that a tentacle turns into a phallic device through means of social articulation.

One can extend a similar thinking towards the transformation of virtually anything into a phallic device. If we go far enough, we may have a structure for a proof of the notorious Rule 34. ^o^

AFAIK, one of the octopus' tentacles is different from the other, and actually is a penis. It serves to deliver a capsule of semen to the female. Among other functions of the tentacle. We can't even list all the functions of the head of a bird, or of the body of a bird, so replacing them with mechanical devices performing just a small number of functions each is highly unlikely to turn out allright. Pretty picture, by the way. I hope you're not of the kind preferring to leave questions unanswered :-D

Wahey, interesting fact there! It makes tentacle sex fetish less unbelieveable. (But only a little. Whoo.) I do find tentacled molluscs fascinating, and hope to draw some.

Well, say we draw the body of the bird as a set of machines that (while not in the form of a bird's organs) duplicate the complete functions of the body of the bird. I can't draw that kind of detail (yet, haha) but some artists have done that. Then while this "body" functions (i.e. interacts with the world) in the same way as a bird's body does, it is not in the form of a bird's body.

A favourite phrase/question of mine is: If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, looks like a duck, etc., is it a duck?

Is there a mysterious "essence of duck" (mmm, yummy) that makes a duck a true duck?

Also, consider that many artificial human parts (such as heart valves) don't come in the same form or material as the parts they replace, but they are functional. (I do realise that this trend is changing with advances in grown organic parts.)

All in all, if I were to seek answers to these questions in this context, I think I'd find them in the field of cybernetics, A.I. and cyborg ethics.

Thank you for the words and compliments. :3

A duck has no more and no less essence than an atom of carbon Ever tried theories of emergence?

Hahah, yes. ^^ Anyway, in terms of emergence, perhaps a duck could "emerge" from a set of components that together function like a duck. (Which, somehow, makes me think RoboDuck. >w< )

Personally, though, I'm all for the rejection that something has to be organic to be an organism. My own answers tend to affirm that, yes, function need not be bound by certain forms.

You say that some artist have displayed pictures that show machinery duplicating the complete fontions of a bird...Where can I find that or could you give me a link plz

It was done by a Gothic-Baroque biopunk artist, a pic I saw in 1999, I'll see if it's still around. ^_^

thx

Hun. Your art has lots of questions to it. Very deep I like that!
I don't think I can find much discution in this, my mind is not as complex as some here. But I have to agree with Eustache. For a machine to do all the fontions that a brain can do is practicaly impossible...For the brain learns from it's errors and tries to correct them. I do not know if they have yet to create such a complex machinery that can learn to such an extent. Also a cumputer (might be possible one day) cannot have feelings and instincs and moral judgement. I do not know if I am going in the same context as your questions but I still find it insteresting to raise such subject...For god knows that intelectual subjects are HIGLY lacking .

I really like the concept of problem pictures...very abstract thinking, and it's totally true, hilarious, and enlightening at the same time! :D Pretty nice...and yeah, understanding what things are for their uses is rather difficult. I use a cellular phone for communication, and not to occupy myself for the majority of my day...like most people where I live. >_<;;

Sparky

Most surrealist problem pictures are deathly serious and tend to favour shock and paranoia. I come from a family that likes to laugh, and I'd like to think a taste for the humorous runs through my work. ^_^

I was reminded of an ad for a Nokia handphone which had the functions of a computer, music player, camera, etc., calling itself "what computers have become". Our labels for things have become very unreliable in describing their functions, such as calling something a "phone" when it also takes pictures, plays music, etc.

very embarassing...
I mixed up the German word "hummer" which means "lobster" in English. Yes, of course it's the lobster-phone!
I definitely need more concentration when I write in English. Sorry!

I know what you mean. When I was younger I'd been very afraid of these elephants with their unbelievable long legs. Today the painting is hanging in my room. :)

اثنيان? What does that mean? I can read Arabic letters, but I don't know the Arabic language, and I don't know enough to guess the vowels... "Ethnian"? XD

It's a slight bastardisation of "Ithnin" which means "two". There was also a pun involved, but I forgot what it was. ^_^

Oh, Ithnaan/Ithnayn. ^_^

A tentacle is like a penis because it can be used to penetrate. Function follows form if creativity is involved.