Trafalgar Square's fourth plinth - Page 7

marky · 15-09-2005, 20:24

Is this thread about the work of art, or were it is located ?

I like the statue, it speaks for itself, as for the location, i would prefer it be in hyde park or a place simillar to that for all to see

15-09-2005, 20:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Agreed! You see unlike you I have no qualms about art being used to depict ALL that needs to be represented in our lives.Art is a means by which an artist expresses their feelings about EVERYTHING that occurs in life.A picture/statue says a thousand words.

but then again i would find a statue of an old lady being beaten up by a yob just as disgusting as this statue in trafalgar square and would want it removed because in my opinion they would both lower the common decency of this country.
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

The history of art is littered with nudes. At what point did they start denigrating public morality?

But I repeat there is nothing in any way sexual about this imagery. It's a nude representation, there is none of the meat and two veg, coy posing etc which marks out eroticism or pornography.

what i'm trying to say is why put it where little kids can see it,you wouldn't let let little kids see a porno mag would ya.

15-09-2005, 20:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

but then again i would find a statue of an old lady being beaten up by a yob just as disgusting as this statue in trafalgar square and would want it removed because in my opinion they would both lower the common decency of this country.

A sculpture depicting violence is some way removed from a sculpture depicting the human body. Depicting something natural, if thought provoking, lowers standards of decency? OK, I'm off to show the kids. Their critique will follow!

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

what i'm trying to say is why put it where little kids can see it,you wouldn't let let little kids see a porno mag would ya.

But it's not porn. Nobody thinks it's porn. Blimey O'Reilly!

15-09-2005, 20:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Now we are getting away from the point.Naked statues have never made people into thieves or muggers,it their circumstances that do that.I think that looking at naked statues or grand master's depictions of nakedness have not depraved me in any way.They have uplifted me to see how beautiful the human body truly is and how fantastic the Grand Masters/Mistresses are at depicting it.

how do you know peado's weren't turned on by naked statues when they where kids.
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

A sculpture depicting violence is some way removed from a sculpture depicting the human body. Depicting something natural, if thought provoking, lowers standards of decency? OK, I'm off to show the kids. Their critique will follow!

__________________

But it's not porn. Nobody thinks it's porn. Blimey O'Reilly!

why is it not porn.personally i think it should be classed as soft porn.
and another thing if a woman was to sit in trafalgar square naked,how long do you think it would be before she was arrested under the common decency act not long i bet but they can erect a naked statue and nobody bats an eyelid.

15-09-2005, 20:42

Well the kids don't like the sculpture.

I talked through the story behind it, which they seemed to take on board. The youngest was pretty disinterested the eldest, when pushed, admitted to being a 'bit' embarassed by it. But we talked about what it meant, so might get them thinking.

I don't think they've been damaged by the experience!

15-09-2005, 20:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

how do you know peado's weren't turned on by naked statues when they where kids.

What twaddle.

OK - I said I wasn't coming back to this, but this is an outrage. This idiot is spewing about decency and morals and generally hogging the thread, where any discussion of art etc. has been overwhelmed by this banal arguing.

How can someone who thinks

Quote:

long live bernard manning the king of comedy.

Really have a valid opinion on decency and morality? The man was a disgrace!

Gareth · 15-09-2005, 20:45

Blimey, mate, you're going on about this statue of a woman naked being offensive, yet your signature says ' long live bernard manning the king of comedy.' - I always thought he was one of the most offensive people to walk this planet. Give me a statue of a naked woman - with or without arms - over Bernard Manning spouting his offensive drivel any day of the week.

Oops, I'm not supposed to be here... best go quickly before anyone notices.

15-09-2005, 20:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

Well the kids don't like the sculpture.

I'm not surprised. It's a grown-up piece of art. All credit that they managed to see it objectively.

15-09-2005, 20:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

how do you know peado's weren't turned on by naked statues when they where kids.

Eh?

Quote:

why is it not porn personally i think it should be classed as soft porn..

Do you really see anything erotic in this statue?

Quote:

and another thing if a woman was to sit in trafalgar square naked,how long do you think it would be before she was arrested under the common decency act not long i bet but they can erect a naked statue and nobody bats an eyelid.

Well depictions of nudity and nudity itself are quite, quite different. Mind you, I'd watch out for that artist who specialises in getting huge crowds of naked people together in public places. I'm guessing Constable might be more to your liking

Gareth · 15-09-2005, 20:46

ack - I type too slowly some times

15-09-2005, 20:48

Maybe, instead of Alison Lapper, the commission should have been for a little green monster, depicted lurking under a bridge!

**Maggy** · 15-09-2005, 20:48

LMAO at this thread.Oh how I've missed CF for the last week!

dilli-theclaw · 15-09-2005, 20:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Incognitas

LMAO at this thread.Oh how I've missed CF for the last week!

Tell me - did you get withdrawal symptoms?

punky · 15-09-2005, 20:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

why is it not porn.personally i think it should be classed as soft porn.

Being topless and merely standing there isn't pornographic. That's why The Sun and Daily Sport can be sold to children.

15-09-2005, 20:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

Maybe, instead of Alison Lapper, the commission should have been for a little green monster, depicted lurking under a bridge!

You're being way too subtle there...