Hello Teacup, Sue, and others,

Well, I have looked closely at this painting (high res internet image) and I'm blessed if I can see anything even remotely sexual about it.

In a book by the late Carl Sagan (sorry, can't recall its title) appears a photograph of a particular large Mayan glyph.
Sagan asks the reader what he/she thinks this glyph represents (he's doing what I think is called 'a psychological projective test')
Try as one may, it is difficult, if not impossible, to make out what the engraving is meant to be of.
Over the page from the photo Sagan suggests to the reader that the glyph is in fact an image of a multi-wheeled amphibious vehicle (the test is part of a criticism of von Daniken's theories).
Look back at the photo and, lo and behold, it becomes what Sagan suggests it is.

Many years ago I read Desmond Morris' "The Naked Ape' and have never looked at a lampost the same way since

My point is, given the detail of the painting, especially in the folds of the people's clothing, and with Sagan and Morris in mind, I think it quite possible that these, um, shapes that some folk see in the painting were not wittingly put there by the artist.

But, then, what do I know about art?
After all, I'm one of those people who refuse to recognise the likes of Damien Hurst and Tracy Irman as artists


Regards,

Alex