McAvennie
Justified & Ancient
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2003
- Messages
- 3,996
"Iconoclasm is the social belief in the importance of the destruction of icons and other images or monuments, most frequently for religious or political reasons."
Given recent events in Bristol and Virginia, what is the mood with regards to the removal of statue's of people deemed by some to no longer be cromulent?
This is not a new phenomenon of course, the statues of Saddam Hussein have gone from Iraq and many Soviet-era statues have been torn down, or relocated to retirement parks, although, hundreds if not thousands do remain across Russia and the former states.
Many Confederate statues have already gone and I suspect the sweep of history will remove many more in the years to come... Purely from an artistic standpoint, the bas relief on Stone Mountain in Georgia would be a terrible loss if ever we reach a point where it is on the frontline of the criticism.
Religious statues from way further back have suffered and been damaged if not destroyed.
What is the preference here? We have semi-regular reviews and remove those that are now deemed to offend? Destroy them forever or move them as pieces of art to a museum or gallery where their story can be told in proper context?
Who decides who should stay and who should go? It surely cannot be a fair approach to leave it to an angry rabble or a zealous local council to decide while someone with similar credentials in a more sedate town remains standing? How do you judge what level of heinous act vs the rest of the person's deeds decides that they should come down?
Should we only have statues that reflect the people of our times, or those who are unequivocally good eggs? There are vast numbers of statues I see who I have no idea who the person is and couldn't give a fig about them. Should they all be removed for no longer being relevant?
Do we even need statues? Would we miss them if they were all removed.
Lastly, at the risk of opening a tinderbox... who would you get rid of. The Duke of Sutherland statue in the north of Scotland would be the first toppled and thrown in the North Sea on my watch, replaced with a large bronze depiction of a Highland family huddled together to mark those who suffered forced eviction by the British from their farmland and homes. Anything of Cromwell as well can come down.
Given recent events in Bristol and Virginia, what is the mood with regards to the removal of statue's of people deemed by some to no longer be cromulent?
This is not a new phenomenon of course, the statues of Saddam Hussein have gone from Iraq and many Soviet-era statues have been torn down, or relocated to retirement parks, although, hundreds if not thousands do remain across Russia and the former states.
Many Confederate statues have already gone and I suspect the sweep of history will remove many more in the years to come... Purely from an artistic standpoint, the bas relief on Stone Mountain in Georgia would be a terrible loss if ever we reach a point where it is on the frontline of the criticism.
Religious statues from way further back have suffered and been damaged if not destroyed.
What is the preference here? We have semi-regular reviews and remove those that are now deemed to offend? Destroy them forever or move them as pieces of art to a museum or gallery where their story can be told in proper context?
Who decides who should stay and who should go? It surely cannot be a fair approach to leave it to an angry rabble or a zealous local council to decide while someone with similar credentials in a more sedate town remains standing? How do you judge what level of heinous act vs the rest of the person's deeds decides that they should come down?
Should we only have statues that reflect the people of our times, or those who are unequivocally good eggs? There are vast numbers of statues I see who I have no idea who the person is and couldn't give a fig about them. Should they all be removed for no longer being relevant?
Do we even need statues? Would we miss them if they were all removed.
Lastly, at the risk of opening a tinderbox... who would you get rid of. The Duke of Sutherland statue in the north of Scotland would be the first toppled and thrown in the North Sea on my watch, replaced with a large bronze depiction of a Highland family huddled together to mark those who suffered forced eviction by the British from their farmland and homes. Anything of Cromwell as well can come down.