Since Leo hasn’t shown up here to answer the “human” questions yet … I’m going to go out on a limb and give you my best interpretation of the rule. As it states,
The relationship of master-to-servant can be human-to-creature or creature-to-human, one-to-many or many-to-one. It could be based on power and conquest, love, hate, lust, benevolence, exploitation, faith, belligerence, psychosis, fear, adoration, debt, tradition, challenge… However, the nature of these roles is one that is particular to the human condition, and therefore requires at least one human component, whether in the dominant or the submissive role.
in the most strictest interpretation, I’d say that this means that at least one character in the Master or Servant role must be human.
However, I know from previous challenges and being a part of the discussions (with the Forum Leaders and Admins) regarding the challenges that flexibility is tolerated to some extent. So, if you want to make the “human” into a mechanical, mythological or alien form my best suggestion is to make sure that this character easily demonstrates “human” characteristics. Most importantly, emotion.
Your illustration should key on a specific character(s) and it’s relation to another(others). If the role of Master & Slave is too ambiguous or vague, lacks emotional connection or has all the personality traits of a rock or toaster … then I’m afraid that you’ve violated this “human” rule of the challenge. Final judging from the panel of judges will undoubtedly pick up on these things.
So, if you want to remain within the rules … at least one human. If you want to push the rules and try something that may fit the challenge theme without a human … better make it human in ways that we associate emotional, physical or mental characteristics to homo sapiens.
Or … wait until Leo lays down the law.