Trafalgar Square's fourth plinth - Page 3

15-09-2005, 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScaredWebWarrior

That's just prudish.

maybe it is prudish but whats wrong with being a prude.
i see on the news every day how somebody's been shot or stabbed,some oap has been mugged,some women raped etc etc.
this country has gone to the dogs and its things like this,that have been part of the ruin of this country.
a so called artist does a statue like this for its shock value then somebody does another one even more shocking and it goes on and on.half a cow in a tank autopsy's on tv,all for the sake of art.
there are no more morals anymore no more decency.

15-09-2005, 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

Does photography count?

Yes, but I wasn't asking you!

Martin · 15-09-2005, 18:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

a so called artist does a statue like this for its shock value then somebody does another one even more shocking and it goes on and on.half a cow in a tank autopsy's on tv,all for the sake of art.
there are no more morals anymore no more decency.

How is it shocking? Because the statue is nude or because she has no arms? I fail to see what is so shocking about the statue!!

15-09-2005, 18:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Seconded! Nothing wrong with a nice nude......

if you say so but there are better places than trafalgar square.

Ramrod · 15-09-2005, 18:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin

Hmmm so if it was a bimbo then that'd be ok?

No it wouldn't!.....see my list of allowable public works of art

15-09-2005, 18:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

No, I disapprove because she is unattractive.

Do think Nelson's a stunna?

15-09-2005, 18:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

maybe it is prudish but whats wrong with being a prude.

Because that's nothing but denying the reality of life.

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

a so called artist does a statue like this for its shock value

Not according to the artist' Good to see you can see through to his inner thoughts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

half a cow in a tank autopsy's on tv,all for the sake of art.
there are no more morals anymore no more decency.

Nothing of what you mention is in any way immoral - perhaps in bad taste.

Ramrod · 15-09-2005, 18:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

Do think Nelson's a stunna?

Post #22......."But he still looks heroic and dashing......."

etccarmageddon · 15-09-2005, 18:22

I think the point of the statue is because if you saw her in the street you'd probably instinctively look at her and then pretend you aren't looking - so this statue is to say 'ok, this is what i look like - I'm not embarrased about it so never should you be.'

Considering there is a large element of the general public that have no respect for disabled people - you know the ones - the ******s who park in the disabled spots as they are too lazy to walk further and too ignorant to think of people less able than themselves.....

I think if we want to make a statement which is 'pro' disabled people then lets make a statue of a car minus a disabled badge parked in a disabled spot and plonk it up there! A lot more worthwhile in my opinion than this current statue.

15-09-2005, 18:22

how would you feel and what would you say if you had young children and where walking through trafalgar square and your child asked why there was a statue of a naked lady with no arms up on the plinth.
would you not feel any embarresment.

15-09-2005, 18:23

It's an interesting and clearly - if this thread's anything to go by - a provocative piece. Art should make you think. I can see no reason why people should be offended by the nudity. I mean, woo look, breasts! There are plenty of pieces of public art featuring nudity.

I would also have thought that those of you have yet to sign up to the PC Brigade ( c'mon, you know it makes sense

) would be pleased to see the resilience and resourcefulness of this remarkable British woman being celebrated.
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

how would you feel and what would you say if you had young children and where walking through trafalgar square and your child asked why there was a statue of a naked lady with no arms up on the plinth.
would you not feel any embarresment.

No. Why should I? I'll show the pic to my two if you want.

15-09-2005, 18:34

[QUOTE=ScaredWebWarrior]Because that's nothing but denying the reality of life.

/QUOTE]
so if its reality of life you want why not put up a statue of some junkie snorting coke,or a statue of a drive by shooting.or a women being raped.or a drunken yob throwing up on a friday or saturday night.
there the realities of life but i don't see any one doing a statue of them and putting it in trafalgar square.

15-09-2005, 18:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Public works of art should be uplifting, majestic, grand or at he very least, just beautiful...........

Over the millennia public art has reflected the lives of the people that lived at the time. Some of it was indeed all the things you think it should be.

But there is no should about art.

NitroNutter · 15-09-2005, 18:36

Pretty simple really, I had no plans to go to trafalgar square anytime soon, This hasnt give me any inspiration to hastily change my mind either

Personally i think its the wrong place for it, although I do agree that in general this society does treat disabled in a poor way, and I think most people overcome something to achieve something. There are some counties in Britain removing children from non abusive households purely because theres an element of lacking in the families daily structure, ie Wife is dislexic and cannot read well, there fore takes a little while longer to do certain things etc.

Perhaps that plinth should house gallows or similar for such people who prey on the weak and abuse their position of power.

15-09-2005, 18:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

__________________

No. Why should I? I'll show the pic to my two if you want.

can i ask how old your two are