Whenever there is an oil spill in the world’s oceans, a sea slick is “born”. Countless animals lose their lives to the thick, clinging clutches of oil, dying miserable, wretchedly drawn-out deaths. Sea slicks are born of the lost souls of those animals and the sludge that bound and choked the life from them. As such, sea slicks are always referred to as “they” and “them” rather than “it”, and it’s said that if you chance upon a sea slick near the surface, their soft, melancholy vocalisations carry the haunting remnants of sea birds and the whispers of shoals of fish.
Despite their fearsome appearances, they are very much docile creatures, preferring to near-constantly swim through the depths and the quiet of the sea they were robbed from. Sea slicks are amortal, being unable to die, as they were never truly what we would call “alive” to begin with. Over time, however, sea slicks do disintegrate, usually over the span of several years, losing pieces of semi-sentient oil to the surface waters.
Ambitious wixes track sea slicks to gather these pieces, as they make especially valuable, durable invisibility cloaks capable of protecting wearers from even the deadliest of spells.
I love this! Modern, industrial fantasy creatures. Wow, so cool!
Dude, that’s a lockjaw. crispyfishsticks made those creatures, and the explanation for what they are is clearly in CircuitDruid’s (ramblingheartwood) description. It’s fanart, respect the source.
I really don’t mean this as a personal attack, but as a general commentary, because I have a serious issue with appropriation.
Not only is this fan work of one of crispy magnificent creatures, but I originally posted this with its own story of a dream I had that inspired the work. So you’ve vetoed two artists and their original visions when you claimed this image as your own.
I’m all for being inspired by the works of others, but the manner in which one does so, and gives proper dues to the scorce is critical. This story would have been lovely on its own, citing the image as the tales inspiration would have been flattering, but in this context, presented in this manner it is flat out appropriation.
Please respect the difference. Taking images and changing the original context and adding it to your own work is not only lying, its harmful lying. It directly detracts of its value to its creators by watering down and obscuring the meaning of the original, and takes attention away from the original creator, which for a professional artist, (who even when a respected industry professional typically has a low to non existent public profile) can literally take food of their table.
Crispy does not deserve that. This was a gift for her, and it hurts me deeply that someone would devalue her creative property inadvertently through one of my gifts to her. Please, please, by all means reference, be inspired by, tribute and build upon the works of others, but don’t appropriate work for your own art.
However well meaning, its still theft, and its not harmless. “