check this out, it's pretty incredible.
http://www.reborn-baby.com/adopted-babies.html" title="http://www.reborn-baby.com/adopted-babies.html" target="_blank"http://www.reborn-baby.com/ad...

it never ceases to amaze me, the lengths people go to just to recreate nature.
it's no replacement for the real thing of course, but it's marvellous nonetheless. the effort, the technique, the breathtaking verasimilitude, and most of all the love that goes into it.

what is art anyway? is anything created as an expression of some sort of idea or emotion art?
what does this express then? maybe art doesn't always need to have a point, it could just be an object of gratifying beauty, that evokes emotions. these babies sure do evoke some strong feelings i guess. the artist revealed that her customers were mainly doll collectors, parents missing their grandchildren and even mothers who had lost their babies. seems pretty creepy to me, to cradle a doll and channel such strength of sentiments into it. perhaps this is what huxley meant in brave new world, of a mother's cloying affection for her offspring.

which brings me to another thought: what is love anyway? i mean, there's love and there's love. the holding kind and the freeing kind. the sculpting kind and the growing kind. pygmalion hewing from ivory a veritable vision, object of his desire. a gardener lovingly watering, waiting, tending his trees - he prunes, yes, but no bonsai does he intend to create. these are extremes of course, not mutually exclusive but definitions are definitely elusive.

i for my part, shall return to writing my travel supplement.