Get the picture?

Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?”
Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.”

— Matthew 18:21-22 of the Revised Standard Version

We all put a lot of distance between ourselves and serious criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, in fact, down here on Earth we put them in prison to distance ourselves from them as much and for as long as possible. For example, if you burgle and get caught, people will distance themselves from you for a long time. However, as you will see instead of distance, the art on this website puts time between us and serious criminals. What happens to serious criminals in the afterlife? Are they forgiven? Do we still distance ourselves from them? I think not. Therefore, to reiterate my art puts time between us and serious criminals, not distance or space. When you put time between yourself and a criminal instead of distance, as you will see, it is like prison, however, it is never hateful or malign towards the criminal. It is as light as it possibly can be. (And yes speed is always defined by two things, a distance covered and a time period). Therefore, please be warned that the purpose of the art or the lighthearted images on this website and throughout my essay is to counter or blot-out the negative, grotesque and disturbing ‘images’ that pop into our minds regarding the Holocaust, torture, cannibalism and necrophilia etc. The point that I am saying is that we should stay positive and not dwell on the mortifying examples and statistics of the Holocaust, torture, necrophilia and cannibalism etc, and the subsequent ghastly mental ‘images’ that arise in our minds. Instead try to think of conceptual time travel and these lighthearted and witty images of these people. I like art with a purpose or point, art that is meaningful, such as conceptual art for archaeologists and anthropologists etc. Therefore, most importantly you must understand that my art is a concept. When I say ‘concept’ I do not mean something off the top of my head. I believe most artists just get quick or instant ideas from the top of their heads, whereas to attain the art concept on this website I have read 128 books and wrote a 49k word essay. Think of it more like a PHD archaeologist student who has spent years reading and writing his or her 100k word thesis, and then has an imperative need to visualise something from the distant past such as a primitive tetrapodomorph. That is more like the concept of this art. You can use any genre of art, such as academic, impressionism, modern or pop art etc to depict this concept. My essay and art ask the question, what if we could forgive serious criminals with time and relativity or conceptual time travel? I believe that in the afterlife that all sins real or imaginable are forgiven. I do not believe in hell. Hence, the concept or purpose of my art and essay is the forgiveness of all sins real or imaginable down here in life or on Earth. Note, I read over 100 books and wrote 49k plus words before I attained the concept and the art. For example, art is an under appreciated field until an archaeologist or palaeontologist has an urgent need to visualise something from the distant past etc. Or for example, how else can you see prehistoric man without art? That is unless you have a time machine. Budush! Hence, to understand my art you really need to read my essay or blog. With my art the value lies in the subject, meaning or concept as opposed to art for art’s sake. For example, a still life fruit bowl was fine for Jacopo de’Barbari in the 1504, because it broke new ground, however, I find modern depictions of such as a still life fruit bowl quite pointless and meaningless. Art is a funny field because it can sometimes just be about making something look good, such as just ‘drawing’ for drawing’s sake, such as drawing a dog or a cat to the best of your abilities to get it to look as real as possible. I hate this kind of art.  However, at other times art is essential such as conceptual art for archaeologists or visualising something from the past such as prehistoric people etc. This kind of art I love. Everything that can possibly be done in art has been done, even divisionism and cubism etc. Therefore, I am trying to break new ground with this kind of concept of forgiveness. With my art it is never about the quality of the image, as in academic art or Leonardo Da Vinci or Sandro Botticelli etc. Other people can do much better images or graphic design. But that is exactly my point, in that graphic design or art for art’s sake can sometimes be meaningless and pointless. All that I do is trace and add the face. I am not actually that good an artist. However, I believe the controversy, meaning and concept comes primarily through the faces of my infamous subjects. To reiterate, the most important purpose of my art is that you get the concept. That is all! You undoubtedly can do better. To briefly explain the concept of my art, because Adolf Hitler cared so much about racism and (and I quote) “subhumans,” I have used time, relativity and art to make him a primate or archaic hominin. And because Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal in America in the 20th century, the only thing he can be or equate to is an archaic hominin such as Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic). Therefore, with time and relativity, I have also made him as such. Also, because there was no age of consent in England until 1275, I have used conceptual time travel to make Jimmy Savile a medieval man. This is in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. To reiterate, the above mentioned subjects were anachronistic, in that they all committed sins which are in the wrong space and time, hence I have used time and relativity or conceptual time travel to make them primates, archaic hominins or medieval people etc in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. I believe we can use art, literature, time and relativity to portray the most serious criminals in a lighthearted way. You may say my art is too controversial? However, isn’t art supposed to be controversial? Isn’t art supposed to shock? Isn’t art supposed to break new ground? I believe it is. I have seen some shocking things in the Tate and Royal Academy myself, especially in the over-18 galleries. That’s what I like about my art, in that it is too controversial, even for artists like Damien Hirst or Andy Warhol etc. They would not risk their careers or reputations to draw Adolf Hitler in a lighthearted style for forgiveness etc. For example, impressionism was at first frowned upon by the established art community in the 19th century, and for example, Olympia by Édouard Manet in 1863 was extremely shocking for its time, because although there had always been nudity in art with nymphs, cherubs and Venuses etc no one had ever portrayed what basically amounted to pornographic nudity of a prostitute before.

Olympia by Édouard Manet 1863. This painting was shocking and controversial at the time because it broke new ground with bare pornographic nudity of a prostitute.

Also, The Origin of the World by Gustave Courbet in 1866 was extremely shocking and controversial for its time, and to be honest it is still probably controversial today.

The Origin of the World by Gustave Courbet in 1866 is still probably controversial in modern times.

Also, such as Francis Bacon’s Three Studies for a crucifixion in 1962 was probably considered extreme, disturbing, controversial and shocking for its time, because of its gory and violent depiction of the crucifixion etc.

Francis Bacon’s Three Studies for a Crucifixion in 1962 was probably, disturbing, controversial and shocking for its time, because of its goriness and violence etc.

Therefore, my art is no different for its time. That is, you may condemn it today, but tomorrow it may be the norm, trivial or small potatoes? For example, Monty Python’s 1979 film, Life of Brian was considered extremely shocking and controversial for its time, and was banned in the UK during the late 1970s and 1980s. However, relatively, today this seems ridiculous to us. I would like you to consider this question? How else can you create politically correct art of Adolf Hitler without being negative or using hate towards him? How else can you create art of Adolf Hitler without eulogising, panegyrising, adoring or worshipping etc or conversely without being negative, vindictive, denigrating, condemning or using hate towards him? What is the lightest possible way you can draw or sculpt Adolf Hitler without any of the aforesaid connotations? There is no other way to do this than with conceptual time travel, crime travel or time for forgiveness (what ever you want to call it). For example, The Big Night Down the Drain (1962-63) by Georg Baselitz is a representation of Adolf Hitler masturbating. However, without conceptual time travel or art of forgiveness, this is about as politically correct as an artist can be when depicting Adolf Hitler. As you can see it is entirely negative and hateful.

The Big Night Down the Drain is a painting by the German painter Georg Baselitz. It was painted in the years 1962–1963. It is a grotesque representation of Adolf Hitler, and about as politically correct as Georg Baselitz could be.

The same logic applies to all serious sinners such as Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, not just Adolf Hitler. Adolf Hitler does not even have a gravestone down here on Earth, never mind a public statue or sculpture (and rightly so). However, imagine if there was an art exhibition in the Tate or Royal Academy called something like ‘art of forgiveness’ with drawings like mine and where you could hand out free copies of an essay like mine (for example). Or imagine if there was a permanent art installation with sculptures of many different serious criminals in obviously prehistoric, ancient or medieval contexts, for example in a garden or park called something like ‘the garden of forgiveness’ or ‘the park of forgiveness’. I know that this is would probably be considered too taboo or too controversial in today’s extremely vindictive and anti-racist society, and there would probably be sabotage and lots of Antifa riots etc, however, in theory there should be nothing wrong with such a forgiving art exhibition or installation? In fact, think of this, there could be millions or hundreds of millions of people who have relatively bad sins they wish to absolve? There could be millions of people who need I know that I do and I also know other people who do. Just to briefly explain how time for forgiveness works, I believe everything is relative, even innocence and forgiveness, therefore, if we can universally forgive all sins real or imaginable, represented by three eternal examples, that being Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, then relatively who cares about our minor sins? Therefore, there could millions of people who would would like an art of forgiveness exhibition or an art installation? Also consider this, I have read one book on the Holocaust by Martin Gilbert and although it was an excellent book, it was just full of gory examples and statistics and when I had finished it, it just left me with a bad feeling and negativity etc. Obviously the book was ultimately condemning, as all Holocaust books have to be, because that is the only politically correct way one can write such a book. However, the way we just condemn Adolf Hitler with such books as Martin Gilbert’s does absolutely no favours whatsoever for indigenous Europeans. Therefore, recently I have been thinking about the paradox of how do you write a true and factual historical book about the Holocaust without either just condemning or justifying in the slightest? I mean even though the truth of the Holocaust will be the destruction of indigenous Europeans we can never cover it up. That would Holocaust denial and we can never do that. So how can you write or make true and accurate historical books, documentaries or films about the Holocaust without just ultimately condemning and certainly never justifying or being sympathetic? How can we use forgiveness? I think perhaps an art concept like this one and with an essay like mine may be able to counteract the condemnation? I intend to make more drawings regularly. So more on the way! I am learning Adobe Illustrator and Adobe Fresco as I go, hence you can see the improvement. You are welcome to have and use the images. However, I update them now and again, so pop back regularly. If you would like the full resolution images, click on a thumbnail of your choice, then click ‘View full size’. You may need to scroll down. I use Adobe Illustrator, Adobe Fresco, Adobe Photoshop and Prisma. All done on iPad Air 3 with Apple Pencil. Digital art is the only skill I take from my 2:1 Bachelor of Arts, Computer Animation degree. I also got an A* for GCSE Art. What do you think, pop art or post-impressionism? As mentioned, to create my images I simply use digital image manipulation. I basically just trace and add the face. Therefore, I would like to thank the geniuses, (who are infinitely more talented and skilled than I am) for producing the original fabulous images. I am indebted. You can see the originals here.

Adolf Hitler.

Jeffery Dahmer.

Jimmy Savile.

Albert Einstein.

Get the picture?