davieG Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 thanks hitesh. so can all disabled people have a statue there. what about disabled sports men and women? why is she more speacial than them. Why is anyone more special than anyone else, just the luck of the draw? right place right time? in the know? you have a push character? who knows?
Hitesh Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 thanks hitesh. so can all disabled people have a statue there. what about disabled sports men and women? why is she more speacial than them. As Davieg said, its about being in the right place at the right time. It was just random, there was a spare plinth there and its all about who you know in this world! And someone at the top probably knew the creator and then the rest is history! She also had a high profile documentary made about her a couple years back and also a book about her life etc.
Babylon Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 Disabled women don't really make a contribution, do they? Perhaps we should just sink them into concrete whilst they're still breathing before sticking them on to plinths, save some disability benefit into the process. Seriously though, I think there are more important things to shit a brick about than a statue and a music prize. Oh fock off. Don't try to make me out to be some homophobic racist. You know exactly what my point was. There is nothing wrong with having someone gay or black or disabled... IF they have done something that actually warrants the place. Your comments were bang out of order. In my opinion, what she has done does not warrant the statue. Sure she has done good giving people with disabilities hope that they can still achieve. But... personally someone who has done more for the majority of this country and this world deserved the place more. That's my opinion, you obviously disagree. "Seriously though, I think there are more important things to shit a brick about than a statue and a music prize" Well if there are more important things stop posting on this thread seeing as before this you had posted more than me.
Nationwider Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 Babylon, I'm just going to apologise again because I've obviously offended you. I wasn't trying to make you out to be a homophobic racist. I was attempting a bit of irony but have missed the mark. I spend a lot of my day arguing with people as part of my job, and don't want to drag that into my time away from work. I'm happy to agree to disagree.
stez Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 this woman deserves to be on the plinth because she has shown a lot of disabled people and able bodied people that no matter how shitty your life is (and she has had a shitty life, being hidden from her mum locked away for years etc) if you have the strength you can come back fighting. plus its on a rotation so there's plenty of time for people, who others might see as more deserving subjects, to go on the plinth in the future. just my opinion, so sue my ass!
Rincewind Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 I think I saw the programme about her. Didn't realise it was her. She no doubt has done other stuff so must have a reputation. My post before was tongue in cheek. I'm not an artist or sculptist so do not have much of a right to judge the piece from an artistic POV. The only thing I can do is give a view personally to my eye. She probably spent a lot of time and care on it. I respect that. Modern art is more than a picture of a cottage on a box of chocolates it seems. I saw a picture in an old photography magazine once. It was a view which was lopsided and the main subject was half out of the picture. It was shown to some art experts and they raved over it. It turned out the picture was taken by a complete amatuer (or a child) Sometimes the critics can be fooled but generally they do know what they are talking about. :sleeping:
Hullfox Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 I think I saw the programme about her. Didn't realise it was her. She no doubt has done other stuff so must have a reputation. My post before was tongue in cheek. I'm not an artist or sculptist so do not have much of a right to judge the piece from an artistic POV. The only thing I can do is give a view personally to my eye. She probably spent a lot of time and care on it. I respect that. Modern art is more than a picture of a cottage on a box of chocolates it seems. I saw a picture in an old photography magazine once. It was a view which was lopsided and the main subject was half out of the picture. It was shown to some art experts and they raved over it. It turned out the picture was taken by a complete amatuer (or a child) Sometimes the critics can be fooled but generally they do know what they are talking about. :sleeping: Helen Lappin didn't do it Ken, she modelled for it though she is an artist in her own right, trying to breakthrough and become a sought after name. Mark Quinn was the sculptor. He has a track record of similar art, some of his work has been sold for up to a million pounds.
Hullfox Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 Next Statue This is what is replacing the current statue in 18 months time. Personally I can't see the art in this.
CasinoGee Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 Doesn't effect me so I don't care. The statue is rather dull if you ask me.
cisono Posted 16 September 2005 Posted 16 September 2005 Next Statue This is what is replacing the current statue in 18 months time. Personally I can't see the art in this. Just gives the birds the largest possible surface from which to deface the statue itself from
Babylon Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Next Statue This is what is replacing the current statue in 18 months time. Personally I can't see the art in this. Good lord... suddenly the statue as it as now seems a good choice compared to that.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.