Statues

[Cooky]

DANG IT!!!! its insidious

would mounds of dirt be ok

And what about headstones at graveyard, especially the real big ones?

That's too similar to African mud huts... It's cultural appropriation.

 

[Wu Wei]

That's too similar to African mud huts... It's cultural appropriation.

You know, I was not going to go here...but I must...since those are mole hills in the picture......why your just making a mountain out of a mole hill....there...I did it...it had to be said.....someone had to say it.....I leave now.....

Well...tear em all down I guess....I give up

 

[columbus]

Generally I don't change my positions based on whether I'm in the minority, particularly on political issues. If you don't care, so be it.

My opinion did not change. It's still the same as it was.

Communities can decide, peacefully and democratically, what to do with public sculptures.
Personally, I rather like art that stirs up emotional responses. And I dislike destruction of old stuff, I'd rather just add new stuff. I'm really very conservative when it comes to preservation of stuff.

Stuff can't hurt you. Art can't hurt you. The meaning you bring to it might be uncomfortable, but that's on you. The catharsis of violence and destruction might feel good. But in the long run, it doesn't improve the Human situation, it degrades it.
But, humans aren't very good at such basic morality. T'was ever thus....
Tom

 

[columbus]

I'd prefer that no statues be erected to anyone, whether they be sinner or saint.

I'm at the opposite end of that spectrum.

If I won the lottery or something I'd be tempted to commission a statue. A tall Epstein, with one arm around Bill Clinton and the other around Donald Trump. They'd be surrounded by a bevy of scantily clad, "barely legal" girls.

Because I'm just difficult that way.
Tom

ETA ~I'd put it on top of a large plinth designed to attract the public to tag with messages in spray paint and indelible marker.~

 

[Left Coast]

My opinion did not change. It's still the same as it was.

Communities can decide, peacefully and democratically, what to do with public sculptures.
Personally, I rather like art that stirs up emotional responses. And I dislike destruction of old stuff, I'd rather just add new stuff. I'm really very conservative when it comes to preservation of stuff.

Stuff can't hurt you. Art can't hurt you. The meaning you bring to it might be uncomfortable, but that's on you. The catharsis of violence and destruction might feel good. But in the long run, it doesn't improve the Human situation, it degrades it.
But, humans aren't very good at such basic morality. T'was ever thus....
Tom

Art that celebrates owning other human beings as property is not art I care for my government to proudly display. I think promoting such things degrades us, not removing them.

Since you're a fan of communities deciding peacefully what they want to do with public statues, thank goodness for my state's leaders doing just that today:

Columbus statue inside California Capitol being removed

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm at the opposite end of that spectrum.

If I won the lottery or something I'd be tempted to commission a statue. A tall Epstein, with one arm around Bill Clinton and the other around Donald Trump. They'd be surrounded by a bevy of scantily clad, "barely legal" girls.

Because I'm just difficult that way.
Tom

ETA ~I'd put it on top of a large plinth designed to attract the public to tag with messages in spray paint and indelible marker.~

Make God cry you must.

 

[columbus]

Art that celebrates owning other human beings as property is not art I care for my government to proudly display. I think promoting such things degrades us, not removing them.

This is where we disagree. You seem OK with removing such sculptures with violence. I'm not OK with that.

Since you're a fan of communities deciding peacefully what they want to do with public statues, thank goodness for my state's leaders doing just that today:

Columbus statue inside California Capitol being removed

I'm totally good with that.
Provided it was done with a democratic process, which I didn't see mentioned. Maybe that happened. But maybe the city government gave in to the most violent members of the city. I'm not claiming to know.

I don't live there and I only read one media bit.

 

[Left Coast]

This is where we disagree. You seem OK with removing such sculptures with violence. I'm not OK with that.

I would rather it happened through a formal process of government. That said, in the big picture of things to be upset about in the world, protestors defacing or removing statues is fairly low on my list. Far lower than police brutality against living, breathing humans.

I'm totally good with that.
Provided it was done with a democratic process, which I didn't see mentioned. Maybe that happened. But maybe the city government gave in to the most violent members of the city. I'm not claiming to know.

I don't live there and I only read one media bit.

There wasn't a vote of the city residents, if that's what you mean. I'm fine with our governmental representatives making those kinds of decisions on our behalf. That's their job.

 

[columbus]

I'll just bow out of the thread.

 

[crossfire]

Does it really matter which portion of the "new world" he did or didn't visit?

Here's a novel idea.....
Keep statues & monuments, but add messages which really would educate.

I like his idea.

 

[Revoltingest]

I like his idea.

I like your liking it.

 

[SomeRandom]

I expect that only the people who happen upon the statues will learn from them.
That's all I ever intended....except for Jackson's statue with my improvements.
It would become a destination for tourists from around the world.
.

Americanstans learn history through their statues?
That’s horrifying.
I’m from a fairly conservative state, relative to my area. Within a 100 meter radius of my house are at least four statues in public areas paying homage to the ANZAC legacy. (Australiastans version of the US civil war. Which was WWI)
I barely know much about the individual statues and what each specifically commemorates. Not specifically on their own, anyway. I know what they symbolise thanks to basic public education.
Near me are no statues dedicated to the Papa New Guinean native tribes help given to troops during the Second World War. And yet I am very familiar with that part of our history due to public education. Probably moreso than the aforementioned WWI statues and what they symbolise.
Do Americanstans not have basic history embedded into their education system?
Because the education I’m talking about happened when I was like in early Primary (elementary.)

 

[Revoltingest]

Americanstans learn history through their statues?
That’s horrifying.

You must be easily horrified. I have a high tolerance.
When I visit places, I always read all the plaques about wildlife,
geology, history, etc. It's interesting & educational, but it's not a
major education tool. It is nonetheless useful.

I’m from a fairly conservative state, relative to my area. Within a 100 meter radius of my house are at least four statues in public areas paying homage to the ANZAC legacy. (Australiastans version of the US civil war. Which was WWI)
I barely know much about the individual statues and what each specifically commemorates. Not specifically on their own, anyway. I know what they symbolise thanks to basic public education.
Near me are no statues dedicated to the Papa Papua New Guinean native tribes help given to troops during the Second World War. And yet I am very familiar with that part of our history due to public education. Probably moreso than the aforementioned WWI statues and what they symbolise.
Do Americanstans not have basic history embedded into their education system?
Because the education I’m talking about happened when I was like in early Primary (elementary.)

There are indeed history courses in grade schools. We learn spelling too.
Even universities here have 1 or 2, eg, the history of 3rd wave feminist philosophy,
the history of international victimization studies, then history of intersectional
marxist philosophy, the history of bourgeois white privilege, the history of
erasure of cultures of people of color.

Why object to using statues to illuminate history, & inspire further inquiry?

 

[Wu Wei]

What statues think about all this

 

[SomeRandom]

You must be easily horrified. I have a high tolerance.
When I visit places, I always read all the plaques about wildlife,
geology, history, etc. It's interesting & educational, but it's not a
major education tool. It is nonetheless useful.

Not really. Just usually drunk and so prone to hyperbole.
It’s a tool, a rather boring tool, but a tool I guess.

There are indeed history courses in grade schools. We learn spelling too.
Even universities here have 1 or 2, eg, the history of 3rd wave feminist philosophy,
the history of international victimization studies, then history of intersectional
marxist philosophy, the history of bourgeois white privilege, the history of
erasure of cultures of people of color.

Sounds like y’all are all kinds of edumacated.

Why object to using statues to illuminate history, & inspire further inquiry?

I don’t, not necessarily anyway. But I also find it dangerous to idolise a statue to the point where one objects to its destruction when it is quite obviously causing distress to the population.
Besides statues are so 20th century. All my learnin’ was through interactive activities and fact filled sketch shows. Far more interesting and engaging than a boring old statue.
Statues are for art, if it wants to be for history purposes it should be in a museum otherwise I consider it false advertisement lol

 

[Revoltingest]

Not really. Just usually drunk and so prone to hyperbole.
It’s a tool, a rather boring tool, but a tool I guess.

You don't read the signs & plaques when visiting points of interest?
Then you should side with my advocating making them more
informative & compelling.

Sounds like y’all are all kinds of edumacated.

In what matters, yah, you betcha!

I don’t, not necessarily anyway. But I also find it dangerous to idolise a statue to the point where one objects to its destruction when it is quite obviously causing distress to the population.

Dangerous, eh.....only if one topples onto you.
So many people see statues as meaning only honor & idolization.
I propose changing that....make'm about full history, which could
mean dishonor & infamy for some.

Besides statues are so 20th century. All my learnin’ was through interactive activities and fact filled sketch shows. Far more interesting and engaging than a boring old statue.
Statues are for art, if it wants to be for history purposes it should be in a museum otherwise I consider it false advertisement lol

Confining history into a few museums solely cuz some
people find them offensive seems boring & censored.

 

[SomeRandom]

You don't read the signs & plaques when visiting points of interest?
Then you should side with my advocating making them more
informative & compelling.

Well yeah, but that doesn’t really do anything. It’s one thing to absorb information, actually learning something is the next step. Like I could be told that Koalas eat eucalyptus and that causes their often sleepy behaviour. But if someone shows me the biochemical reaction that occurs, I feel like I would come away with a much better understanding and actually having learnt something. Its why teachers not only rely on texts but examples to actually teach. In all subjects.

Dangerous, eh.....only if one topples onto you.
So many people see statues as meaning only honor & idolization.
I propose changing that....make'm about full history, which could
mean dishonor & infamy for some.

I would favour more statues to reflect the “other side.” For instance I would favour more statues dedicated to the PNG tribes who helped our ANZACS if they were erected alongside other statues or just by themselves. IOW, I guess more representation in statues.
But if a statue was historically erected to show who is “really in charge” like what supposedly happened with regards to I think Robert E Lee (please correct me if I’m wrong. Its been a while since History class.) Then I probably wouldn’t be too concerned with such a statue being demolished. Sometimes such actions can be cathartic.
Sometimes in order for meaningful change the old world needs to burn down. Tear em all down and begin anew. It’s the age of the internet, no one needs a statue to be reminded of anything anymore.

Confining history into a few museums solely cuz some
people find them offensive seems boring & censored.

History is all around us. Reflected in buildings, sites, in architecture, tourist attractions and even in art. I don’t know how removing statues confines history to museums. One need only look around with a curious eye.

 

[Revoltingest]

History is all around us. Reflected in buildings, sites, in architecture, tourist attractions and even in art. I don’t know how removing statues confines history to museums. One need only look around with a curious eye.

So long as there's no info about them posted, eh?

 

[SomeRandom]

So long as there's no info about them posted, eh?

No info? There are libraries full of info about such things. Hell such historical avenues are even reflected in the canon. Like Victor Hugo’s Hunchback of Notre Dame was literally written to call attention to the historic site, which was being neglected up until then. (In Hugo’s view anyway.) I thought you said you guys were edumacated?

 

[Revoltingest]

No info? There are libraries full of info about such things. I thought you said you guys were edumacated?

You oppose having info actually at the sites?
Available only by going elsewhere?
Very strange.
I'm more into immediate gratification.