Pregnant Nude On Plinth Provokes Puking

[molly bloom]

The vacant plinth in Trafalgar Square is to be the scene of an unveiling this morning of a sculpture of an artist, Alison Lapper, who is depicted as being obviously pregnant. Ordinarily a sculpture of a nude female (even pregnant) wouldn't cause much of a stir, except that Alison Lapper is pregnant and was born with phocomelia, meaning she has foreshortened legs and vestigial upper limbs.


Her friend Marc Quinn, famous for his bust of blood sculpture has created this new work for the important site for public art in the heart of London- and it's causing a stir:

The decision to place Marc Quinn's 15-foot marble sculpture Alison Lapper Pregnant on the empty plinth in London's Trafalgar Square has caused huge controversy.

The media has largely been critical of the sculpture, describing it as "all message and no art".

The Evening Standard's art critic Brian Sewell (he of the infamously posh voice) said "I dislike the Quinn intensely ... it's a gloriously fudged decision and they better try and get it right next time", which is so arrogant that I'm quite tempted to jump on the plinth and bear my own bloody breasts.

The focus throughout the media has been largely on Alison's personal life, as opposed to her work as a talented artist in her own right.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/news/btn/vlucas_plinth4.shtml

[Ecthy]

Yes. I do want to puke in face of the artist and the sculpture. Does that make me a philistine?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Yes. I do want to puke in face of the artist and the sculpture. Does that make me a philistine?

Possibly.

Some of the negative responses have been aimed at the portrayal of a woman with disabilities, and what's worse, a pregnant naked woman with disabilities !!!!


Apparently it's okay to depict naked or semi-naked overweight politicians in public sculpture, a large semi-naked woman whose arms accidentally came off, but a real live woman with disabilities ?


Especially in one of London's most famous squares, underneath a column which has a statue of a famous British military hero.


Who had acquired disabilities....

[C0ckney]

they should have put something better looking and more tasteful on that empty plinth. like a giant turd...

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by C0ckney
they should have put something better looking and more tasteful on that empty plinth. like a giant turd...

They haven't elected the new Tory leader yet.

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by molly bloom
Some of the negative responses have been aimed at the portrayal of a woman with disabilities, and what's worse, a pregnant naked woman with disabilities !!!!

The much better negative responses were aimed at the general bizzareness of having a nude pregnant woman finishing off the quartet of military history.

You could argue that it's the right sculpture, but in the wrong arena...
But if it was simply exhibited in a gallery, only a minority of people with an interest in modern art would see it. At least in Trafalgar Square it will be seen by a wider audience of young people, whose notions of difference and diversity are just beginning to form.

Only a minority of people with an interest in modern art see 99% of art that is done. Why not choose a sculpture which is actually good for display? Besides which, neither naked nor pregnant are majority situations for any individual, and forming notions of difference and diversity on the principal that they are is daft.

[Combat Ingrid]

You got the strength,
You got the courage,
Even with a dead fetus on yo' head,
You carry on,
You fight for tommorow,
A dead fetus know,
You never let go,
Your my conjoined twin--dead thing hanging off yo' head woman.

[Peter Triggs]

Alison Lapper Pregnant by Marc Quinn and Hotel for the Birds by Thomas Schütte beat four other nominations.

The winners were selected by the Fourth Plinth Commissioning Group after taking comments from the public, who saw scale models at the National Gallery.

They will be shown for up to 18 months each from spring 2005, starting with Mr Quinn's disabled, pregnant woman.

The other shortlisted contenders included a car covered with bird droppings and two life-size Tomahawk cruise missiles.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3511968.stm

I would have voted for the car covered with bird droppings.

[Patroklos]

As least it is a urinated on canvas with **** smeared over it, which is what has passed for art in NYC in the past.

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by molly bloom
They haven't elected the new Tory leader yet.

when trolling in future, i'll remember to take your bitterness into account

but seriously, IW makes a very good point. there are so many things they could have put there which would have been more suitable and looked better.

[lord of the mark]

should standards for public art be different than standards for art in general?

Since the rise of modernism, the function of the best art has been in fact to shock, to challenge sensibility rather than expressing shared values. But is that appropriate for public art in busy places, where large portions of the public do NOT have a choice but to see it?

[MosesPresley]

This sculpture is tasteful and beautifully done. It seems to be a comment on the Venus de Milo.

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
The much better negative responses were aimed at the general bizzareness of having a nude pregnant woman finishing off the quartet of military history.

Maybe she should be holding a flag and a rifle while sitting on a dead body?

I see people with disabilities everyday, are they not human? Her deformity is obviously disturbing a lot of people who would prefer not see the truth of her intelligently designed body.

I do not see anything ugly about this sculture. If you think deformed people are ugly, maybe you need to look again.

[Patroklos]

Just because someone thinks she is ugly doesn't mean they think they are not human. Alot of people who are not disabled are ugly to, and still human.

She is ugly. I would not want the sculture displayed for the same reason I don't like ugly buildings.

[lord of the mark]

the FDR memorial in DC has a sculpture of FDR in his chair. Nothing unheroic about it.

But hes not nude (thank goodness)

Is this about disability, or about what a nude sculpture should be?

Prudish cultures did not have nude art. The Greeks did have nude art, as a celebration of the perfection of human beauty. The Renaissance picked up and ran with that idea, and it was with us till the age of abstract art.

Well, representational art is back, but classical and renaissance ideals havent come back with it. So what IS the function of a nude sculpture today?

Myself, I think the return to representational art isnt such a hot idea.

[MosesPresley]

Originally posted by Patroklos
She is ugly.

What's ugly about her?

Originally posted by lord of the mark
the FDR memorial in DC has a sculpture of FDR in his chair. Nothing unheroic about it.

I like that. This sculpture is heroic. It took courage to portray herself in such an honest manner. Especially when I am sure she knew what the public's initial reaction would be.

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Is this about disability, or about what a nude sculpture should be?

I definitely think the sculpture raises that question. Nude art, imo, is supposed to make us look at ourselves honestly.

Originally posted by lord of the mark
So what IS the function of a nude sculpture today?

The same as it was in the Renaissance, to portray the beauty and the human race's transcendence over nature.

This is a bold sculpture. In a generation or two, when people pass by this sculpture, they won't give it a second glance. What concerns me is what will happen to the sculpture in the short term. Some public modern art, the Clown Ballerina by Borofsky comes to mind, is vandalized by the public. In the case of the Borofsky, I can see why. It is supposed to be humorous, but it comes off as monstrosity and an eyesore.