Mary Wollstonecraft statue

[Nearly Sane]

Is the subject of some controversy


https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/mary-wollstonecraft-statue-feminist-icon_uk_5faa8971c5b6f21920dfc741?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABdjGUd7MfP6_kH68N83zCY3vgW1lO01o3LjDmSHzNP08r4pmYLLEOpe71wuZnwSgiC202-WHFhpYW3l8dWnqYBEpfXZNY80MUMy07gsySksAT5k7VK3hKSHRR2utLhx0MWjTAVQ-7XLZSmUi9izRrkzGEuAz4o4B6uqeD_o6_o6

[Robbie]

I like it & the fact that the statue provokes controversy is appropriate because she did.
Guardian ariticle about it:-
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/nov/10/mary-wollstonecraft-finally-honoured-with-statue-after-200-years

[Nearly Sane]

I think there is a worry that the discussion becomes about the art itself rather than Wollstonecraft. One thing that isn't clear from some pictures is how small the figure itself is. I have seen a picture after someone has 'dressed' it and a face mask is big enough to be a cape.

Anyway it prompted a thread on Twitter showing other statues of women that I enjoyed


https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1326178502828314625.html

[Nearly Sane]

And a take

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/nov/10/why-i-hate-the-mary-wollstonecraft-statue?fbclid=IwAR3456Jrj1kJeyH9Te4CrTAr2vGBTfUJtdgUdRSJWmOWUesqvf5eTiIeG6A

[Steve H]

I'd admire it in an art gallery, or outdoors if it wasn't meant to celebrate MW, but as it is it draws too much attention to itself. A statue of MW should be just that, and no more: a life-size representation of her, or a bust on a pedestal, with no clever arty-fartiness about it, so that it concentrates on her, not the artist.
This is how you do it:
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/DTW7EK/a-general-view-of-the-new-statue-of-noor-inayat-khan-at-gordon-square-DTW7EK.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/c7/7b/3fc77bb784ba098ee7bc1932927d8873.jpg
https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/london-dec-emmeline-pankhurst-statue-victoria-tower-gar-gardens-70772637.jpg
Not necessarily with the theatrical, mannered gestures of No. 3 (Emmeline Pankhurst), but along those lines.

[Nearly Sane]

It could end up like the Little Child of Prague with lots of outfits. The Little Child though is a lot bigger than the figure of a woman in the statue

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/mary-wollstonecraft-sculpture-covered-clothes-feminism-b65266.html?fbclid=IwAR19rA2P0mt2rFek7Cmx5g6B8u6G9bVhCk-AF-12X0myOL080Z7aJfyDvhs

[jeremyp]

I like it & the fact that the statue provokes controversy is appropriate because she did.
Guardian ariticle about it:-
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/nov/10/mary-wollstonecraft-finally-honoured-with-statue-after-200-years

When I first saw the statue it was in somebody else's outraged tweet. And I agreed the tweet had a point but it was presented (in the tweet) as a statue of Mary Wollstonecraft that a memorial to her.

Having read NS's link, I realise the statue is not meant to be a likeness of Mary and I think the tweet is wrong. I still don't like it as a piece of art, but that is just my personal taste.

[Owlswing]

When I first saw the statue it was in somebody else's outraged tweet. And I agreed the tweet had a point but it was presented (in the tweet) as a statue of Mary Wollstonecraft that a memorial to her.

Having read NS's link, I realise the statue is not meant to be a likeness of Mary and I think the tweet is wrong. I still don't like it as a piece of art, but that is just my personal taste.

Is not all art a matter of personal taste?

Owlswing

)O(

[Steve H]

Is not all art a matter of personal taste?

Owlswing

)O(

No - otherwise Patience Strong would be one of the greatest modern poets, being one of the most popular. There are objective (strictly, inter-subjective, but let's not quibble) standards by which art can be judged.

[Nearly Sane]

No - otherwise Patience Strong would be one of the greatest modern poets, being one of the most popular. There are objective (strictly, inter-subjective, but let's not quibble) standards by which art can be judged.

Evidence of the objectivitity.

[Steve H]

Evidence of the objectivitity.

I've just given you some, you dolt - or do you think Patience Strong is a great poet? If it's purely subjective, she must be, because popularity is then the only guide.

[Owlswing]

No - otherwise Patience Strong would be one of the greatest modern poets, being one of the most popular. There are objective (strictly, inter-subjective, but let's not quibble) standards by which art can be judged.

Please translate this into words that this semi-literate male ass can understand.

[Nearly Sane]

I've just given you some, you dolt - or do you think Patience Strong is a great poet? If it's purely subjective, she must be, because popularity is then the only guide.

You have just asserted it. Nothing more. You really have no understanding of logic.

[Gordon]

No - otherwise Patience Strong would be one of the greatest modern poets, being one of the most popular. There are objective (strictly, inter-subjective, but let's not quibble) standards by which art can be judged.

But inter-subjective presumptions still aren't 'objective' if these presumptions are based on a personal assessment of value or worth, since in the absence of a metric of some sort any such assessments are subjective since they are based on the biases and experiences of the assessor, or assessors where a consensus is reached. A consensus that, for example, Yeats was a better poet than Patience Strong isn't an objective statement, even if subjectively that is the consensus.

If it were otherwise then surely we could calculate relative scores that would show, say, that some poems are more profound than others. 

 

[jeremyp]

Is not all art a matter of personal taste?

Yes.

Your point?

[jeremyp]

There are objective (strictly, inter-subjective, but let's not quibble) standards by which art can be judged.

I'll add my voice to the baying mob.

What are these objective standards?

When you think about it, most of us accept great artists as such purely on the grounds that some intellectuals told us so. Why is Shakespeare the greatest ever playwright? I think my best shot at an answer would be "because my English teacher said so". Personally, I'd rather watch a couple of episodes of Buffy the Vampire Slayer than Hamlet.

[Owlswing]

I'll add my voice to the baying mob.

What are these objective standards?

When you think about it, most of us accept great artists as such purely on the grounds that some intellectuals told us so. Why is Shakespeare the greatest ever playwright? I think my best shot at an answer would be "because my English teacher said so". Personally, I'd rather watch a couple of episodes of Buffy the Vampire Slayer than Hamlet.

I wish that I had thought of your last paragraph when I was at school. It might have made Mrs Williams' English lessons far more interesting. I'm not sure about Buffy, but I can think of TV shows I would rather watch than Othello or the Merchant of Venice which this Welsh lady had us dissect line by line in an attempt to define what the Bard was talking about!

Owlswing

)O(

[jeremyp]

I'm not sure about Buffy, but I can think of TV shows I would rather watch than Othello

When I was studying Othello at school, Sarah Michelle Gellar was only four years old.

[Owlswing]

When I was studying Othello at school, Sarah Michelle Gellar was only four years old.

I was 14 (1960) when I was studying under the delightful Mrs Williams and I dread to think how old Buffy was!

[Nearly Sane]

When I was studying Othello at school, Sarah Michelle Gellar was only four years old.

Off the subject of the thread (note I think the discussion of standards in art is on topic), but on the subject of SMG and the US election:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8935633/Sarah-Michelle-Gellar-reacts-Stacey-Abrams-discussing-Angel-Spike-right-one.html

[Steve H]

You have just asserted it. Nothing more. You really have no understanding of logic.

Get stuffed.

[Nearly Sane]

Get stuffed.

And having only made an empty assertion, you then have a little temper tantrum when it is pointed out.

[Steve H]

And another thing: "temper tantrum" is an oxymoron. All you need to say is "tantrum".

[Owlswing]

Off the subject of the thread (note I think the discussion of standards in art is on topic), but on the subject of SMG and the US election:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8935633/Sarah-Michelle-Gellar-reacts-Stacey-Abrams-discussing-Angel-Spike-right-one.html

Apologies and thanks for only giving a quick slap on the wrist as punishment!