Israeli vandalises Swedish suicide bomber art

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Hey, I've got a great idea for a piece of artwork for this collection. Let's calculate the number of Nazis guns, ammunition, planes, tanks and bombs produced during WW2 using Swedish steel and other materials, then extrapolate the number of allied soldiers and civilians killed by them. Then we could design a giant collage depicting the victims of Sweden's "efforts" in WW2. Anyone here think that such a peice of work would go over very well at this conference?

Go for it.

[BeBMan]

Hm, generally I think running around and destroying things I don´t like is not a good idea

However, while I don´t think he was right I admit I have some sympathies for the ambassador´s action too - couldn´t he simply label it as performance art?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Edan


While also using Snow White as an analogy, calling her an "innocent heart being devoured by wild beasts" and a "poor child"

Oh for ****'s sake, READ THE ARTISTS' WORDS. You're making up their meaning using the fairy tale to suit what you want it to be! They did NOT name it "Snow White" to depict her as innocent, they named it that because she LOOKED like Snow White. The entire point is that she looks so innocent and pure, but then she goes and does something so murderous, which to them is incomprehensible. You're using the words from the fairy tale, that were NOT used by the authors. That's being disingenuous and you know it. Which is surprising coming from you, Edan.

I'll bold it for the dense:

"I wanted to show how incomprehensible it is that a mother-of-two, who is a lawyer no less, can do such a thing," she said.

"When I saw her picture in the paper, I thought she looked like Snow White, that's why I gave that name to the piece," she added.

Gee, right there all the time.

Yes, in perfect makeup looking "innocent" and floating and untouched and unmarred by that blood. The artwork tries to dismiss her culpability, that she's simply a mother of two and a lawyer who just happened to be in a messed up world that placed her in such a situation when in reality, she is guilty of the brutal murder of twenty one people, she was the one responsible for her actions. That she should be portrayed in the manner she was is disgusting and certainly inappropriate in an exhibition on genocide who's scope was not supposed to cover the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

THE CAPTION OF THE ARTWORK CALLS HER A MURDERER! My god, I don't understand how it could be any clearer! This is so frustrating, because you're ingoring the stated intent of the artwork from its Israeli, Jewish creator and just blithely going on with your own assumption of what it means! If the artwork says she is guilty of murdering scores and has her floating a pool of blood, I'd say the artists had pretty effectively conveyed that she was a murderer!

This is just positively ridiculous.

[Winston]

It may seem ridiculous to you, but the Israeli government is backing the ambassador, so there must be something to it, wouldn't you say.

Israel will not participate in next week's conference if the exhibit is not removed. But I guess they're just a bit dense?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Winston
It may seem ridiculous to you, but the Israeli government is backing the ambassador, so there must be something to it, wouldn't you say.

Israel will not participate in next week's conference if the exhibit is not removed. But I guess they're just a bit dense?

Actualy, yes, the current right-wing Israeli government, being made of people who share your views, is rather dense. Thanks for proving my point.

No, just standing next to you.

*giggle*

Well Monk, that is what happends when you stand up too fast and enter the light for the first time..it can make one queasy. on't worry, you wll feel much better having such a clearer view soon enough.

THE CAPTION OF THE ARTWORK CALLS HER A MURDERER! My god, I don't understand how it could be any clearer! This is so frustrating, because you're ingoring the stated intent of the artwork from its Israeli, Jewish creator and just blithely going on with your own assumption of what it means! If the artwork says she is guilty of murdering scores and has her floating a pool of blood, I'd say the artists had pretty effectively conveyed that she was a murderer!

This is just positively ridiculous.

It is rather frustrating, isn;t it? More worrying of course is the fact that some peole choose to igore the obvious becuase it gets in the way of their indignation.

Oh, and whaleboy

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Winston
It may seem ridiculous to you, but the Israeli government is backing the ambassador, so there must be something to it, wouldn't you say.

Israel will not participate in next week's conference if the exhibit is not removed. But I guess they're just a bit dense?

Yes. Sharon's right-wing government is hypersensitive and dense. Considering there's nothing in this exhibit that "glorifies" anything, the Israeli government's stance is stupid. It's also rather fascistic that they'll base their participation in a conference on the display of the personal expression of an artist. Even if the exhibit portrayed what people here are wrongly claiming, why should the Swedish national government have any business to remove it from the Stockholm museum? It's not as if the artwork is meant to be an expression of the official views of the Swedish government. Art museums aren't in the business, usually, of endorsing their artists' political views.

[Combat Ingrid]

The thing is, it would be illegal for the Swedish government to remove the artwork without first proving in a court that it's breaking some law.

That will probably not stop the Israeli government though. They will probably accuse Sweden for anti-semitism. They tend to do that when they don't get what they want from us

[Winston]

The exhibit is displayed in preparation for and direct connection to the conference. That's why the Israelis are upset, and rightfully so IMO.

It's most insensitive to the Israeli people having a piece there depicting the suicide bomber as basically a slightly misguided nice young girl in the middle of a bitter and violent conflict.

As I said before, there's little mitigation to mass murder, and she should not be portrayed with any mitigating features, such as the likening her to Snow White, with all the associations that entails.

[General Ludd]

They should replace all art with giant israeli flags.

[Snotty]

Illegal for Sweden to remove it? Interesting twist. Have the Israelis got any reason to want out of this conference?

As for destroying artwork, the ambassadors act was symbolic. The paper (plastic?) boat and picture were both easily replaced. Its not as if he has taken a machete to the Mona Lisa.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Winston
The exhibit is displayed in preparation for and direct connection to the conference. That's why the Israelis are upset, and rightfully so IMO.

It's most insensitive to the Israeli people having a piece there depicting the suicide bomber as basically a slightly misguided nice young girl in the middle of a bitter and violent conflict.

As I said before, there's little mitigation to mass murder, and she should not be portrayed with any mitigating features, such as the likening her to Snow White, with all the associations that entails.

The wall one might generallybe better here, but your refusal to read and understand is too great..and it enters into the comical.

I won't rehash the 5 or 6 times it has been explained exactly why your interpretation is silly..why someone's picture floating in a pool of blood is hardly a showing of innocense.

NOw, if it was Saron's picture there, in connection to Lebanon, maybe the government might have a little more right to be upset, though the art would be just as powerfull, anf the messaeg just as valid.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Snotty
Illegal for Sweden to remove it? Interesting twist. Have the Israelis got any reason to want out of this conference?

Yes-they are afraid that the issue of their mess with the Palestinans might get dragged up even though it is a conference on genocide. So even thoguh they agreed to go, now they get a chance, no matter how stupid it is.

As for destroying artwork, the ambassadors act was symbolic. The paper (plastic?) boat and picture were both easily replaced. Its not as if he has taken a machete to the Mona Lisa.

He threw an electrical device into a pool of liquid. That is dangerous.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Snotty
As for destroying artwork, the ambassadors act was symbolic. The paper (plastic?) boat and picture were both easily replaced. Its not as if he has taken a machete to the Mona Lisa.

My mother is a curator of an art gallery. There was a young ~15 year old girl who kicked a piece of art that was made up of small pieces of shredded paper and arranged in the shape of a person - it was repairable (but a pain in the ass to do so) but it could've just as easily been something that wasn't. Anyways, the girl was sent a brouchure detailing the art, the artist, and the meaning of the piece she tried to destroy, and was asked to write a letter of apology to the artist. I think the same should be done for the ambassador.

I'm sure he would be embarrassed of his actions, if he actually took the time to learn about what he was trying to destroy.

[Combat Ingrid]

The government has just confirmed the artwork will remain in place because "in Sweden we have freedom of expression, just like in all other democracies"

Link (in Swedish, sorry)

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Winston
The exhibit is displayed in preparation for and direct connection to the conference. That's why the Israelis are upset, and rightfully so IMO.

It's most insensitive to the Israeli people having a piece there depicting the suicide bomber as basically a slightly misguided nice young girl in the middle of a bitter and violent conflict.

As I said before, there's little mitigation to mass murder, and she should not be portrayed with any mitigating features, such as the likening her to Snow White, with all the associations that entails.

One of the (few) good things of the switch from vinyl records to cd's was that we wouldn't be bothered by broken records ever again. Or at least we thought... Having to read your same post over and over in this thread makes me wonder...

Are you really incapable of understanding what other people write? Boris even bolded the important parts...