From a quick glance of the image, the two individuals blend into the composition, forcing the viewer to perceive these two bodies as eternally bound to the earth. The bulky mound of the created by the close proximity of the figures and the sense of unity that is created by the line that is connecting the two garments sustain curvilinear, horizontal movement across the piece; in addition, this “hill” or “mound-like” shape created by the synthesis of these two bodies mimics the image of rolling hills that are so characteristic of the Great Indian Plains. This aesthetic similarity serves as an allusion to a distinct environmental element of Indian Heritage. This “hill-like” attribute also contributes to the aforementioned state of solidity in this piece, for the viewer equates these figures to the hills–they always and will continue to be a permanent facet of the environment. In addition, there is almost no obvious separation between the seated figures and the ground. In fact, the hanging thread detailing of the garments serve to both mimic and blend into the long blades of grass that the two figures are sitting on, blurring …show more content…
The most apparent aspect of Curtis’s piece is the fact that roughly 70 percent of the image is devoted to a body of water. This water is in complete equilibrium, as it is presented as clear, perfect stillness– emulating aspects of glass in terms of smoothness. As a result, this serves to like a mirror for the image as a whole, almost as if its stillness would contribute to a clarity in reflection. In fact, the figures are indeed funneling their field of vision out into the water, which represents a state of reflection not only towards the natural surroundings, but also a reflection on the inner self; this “mirror” symbolizes self-reflection in regards to Indian identity and culture. Another element of proportion is that is of particular interest is both the size and location of the ground in relation to the water. Although the foreground takes up a lesser amount of the composition, it serves as a baseline between the two seated figures and the still body of water. This distinction is not only meant to further emphasize the stillness of the water, but also illuminates a vital symbolic message in relation to these two aspects of the image. The synthesis of the two figures and the grass as one collective foreground presents the fact that the figures’ are touching base upon their roots or origin. As a result, the