Trafalgar Square's fourth plinth - Page 8

15-09-2005, 20:52

I note too that there is no graphic depiction of Alison Lapper's genitalia, nor any allegedly erotic pose - unlike in pornographic representation. Interview with the artist and - horror! - full frontal of the sculpture here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...568604,00.html

Dave Stones · 15-09-2005, 20:57

personally the statue doesn't bother me, i dont like it or dislike it particularly. One of those "overcoming adversity" things and all that is what it looks like to me...

as for the location though, i don't particularly think trafalgar square is the right place for it. It seems a bit too in contrast with all the other artwork that is there...

Martin · 15-09-2005, 21:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

what i'm trying to say is the people complain but nobody cares because there is no moral or common decency anymore.
.

Hmmmm interesting morals you have liking Bernard Manning!

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

you say not.
but if the people of london stood up and said they didn't want nudity on the streets of london it would be a start.
and a start as to be made somewhere.

Hmmm i would say a small minority would be against naked statues!

A violent film will have a more damaging impact on kids, i take it you campaign against that to?

punky · 15-09-2005, 21:00

I don't think people can argue definitively whether it is erotic or not. I though if something is erotic, it is sexually arousing, and so it is subjective? I can imagine there will be plenty of people who'd find that erotic (even if its not intended to be).

15-09-2005, 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Stones

as for the location though, i don't particularly think trafalgar square is the right place for it. It seems a bit too in contrast with all the other artwork that is there...

Just remember - it's only there for 18 months! (I know I said next March earlier, but it seems it's April 2007.)

So for now, it contrasts with the existing works - that's appropriate too.

Maybe it doesn't 'belong' there, in the longer term, but I'm sure it'll find a home.
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by punky

I can imagine there will be plenty of people who'd find that erotic (even if its not intended to be).

And that would, of itself, NOT make it pornography.

There are people who are aroused by the sight of stockinged feet - still no pornography.

Hence, the 'causing arousal' is not a valid test as to whether something is pornographic.

15-09-2005, 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScaredWebWarrior

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

1 i wouldn't lower myself to call you names.
2 i didn't know there was a limit to the number of posts i could put in a thread.
3 i like thousands of others happen to like bernard manning if you don't thats your problem.

Dave Stones · 15-09-2005, 21:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScaredWebWarrior

Just remember - it's only there for 18 months! (I know I said next March earlier, but it seems it's April 2007.)

So for now, it contrasts with the existing works - that's appropriate too.

Maybe it doesn't 'belong' there, in the longer term, but I'm sure it'll find a home.

It is only in my opinion, remember

i'm sure once this thread gathers dust i will forget about it anyway, until the k'nex set goes up. I don't plan on going to london in the next 18 months, so i can't see it being on the news everywhere unless someone goes and defaces it etc.

Is this the disabled woman that crops up on bbc documentaries all the time?

Angua · 15-09-2005, 21:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Stones

It is only in my opinion, remember

i'm sure once this thread gathers dust i will forget about it anyway, until the k'nex set goes up. I don't plan on going to london in the next 18 months, so i can't see it being on the news everywhere unless someone goes and defaces it etc.

Is this the disabled woman that crops up on bbc documentaries all the time?

Yes the Robert Winstone documentary "Child of Our Time".
Her son's name is Paris IIRC.

15-09-2005, 21:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

1 i wouldn't lower myself to call you names.

Maybe not, but you were equally rude to others. Don't bother trying to claim the moral high ground - it's already heavily defended...

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

2 i didn't know there was a limit to the number of posts i could put in a thread.

Maybe there isn't, but you're making a very good case for why there should be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

3 i like thousands of others happen to like bernard manning if you don't thats your problem.

No problem for me. But it really does damage your credibility on your 'morality bandwagon'.
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Stones

It is only in my opinion, remember

And you're welcome to it!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Stones

so i can't see it being on the news everywhere unless someone goes and defaces it etc.

If they do, then I have a prime suspect...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Stones

Is this the disabled woman that crops up on bbc documentaries all the time?

No idea, though I had heard of the artists before this.
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angua

Her son's name is Paris IIRC.

Parys, according to the Guardian article linked earlier.

15-09-2005, 21:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin

Hmmmm interesting morals you have liking Bernard Manning!

Hmmm i would say a small minority would be against naked statues!

A violent film will have a more damaging impact on kids, i take it you campaign against that to?

at the risk of being told off for hogging the thread.
yes i would have issues with violent films they shouldn't be shown to kids.
and i even thought the recent series of bad lads army was disgusting and should never have been shown if itv thinks that showing men washing other mens backsides is entertainment there wrong,its disgusting.

Stuart · 15-09-2005, 21:12

Could we please keep the thread on topic and the personal comments out?

Martin · 15-09-2005, 21:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

yes i would have issues with violent films they shouldn't be shown to kids.

Atlast we agree on something

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy 1

and i even thought the recent series of bad lads army was disgusting and should never have been shown if itv thinks that showing men washing other mens backsides is entertainment there wrong,its disgusting.

Didn't watch Bad Lads but i think it did go out after 9pm!

Anyway i think we're going down the morals avenue and that is a whole new thread, so on that note i'll depart!

**Paul** · 15-09-2005, 21:25

Another reported post. This is worse than a bunch of children, it's a full time job keeping up. We don't have time for this. Once again the minority spoil it for the majority. Topic closed.

Nemesis · 16-09-2005, 10:28

On the basis that people are going to behave within this thread, I will reopen it. The topic is immotive and current. If there is any more trouble then the perpetrator will be dealt with.

orangebird · 16-09-2005, 10:46

I'm indifferent to it really. Don't see what the problem is tbh. You see boobs on the beach, in the newspapers, on the town on a saturday night... It's almost like the Venus bust my mother has in her garden, but with a tummy and legs. Big deal

To all those that are offended and have children - are you going to have your children removed from sex ed classes when they come round? Because what they're going to see then is a damn sight more 'graphic' than the statue is...