|
Post by patty on Jan 7, 2022 17:01:10 GMT
Gosh what an interesting thread... Its given me lots to think about I do not agree with hiding/destroying our past. I do think perhaps museums could use these statues that cause a lot of offence in displays then its up to Jo Public if they go or not Well thinking about it its also up to the individual if they go and walk past these statues and then take offence I don't think taking the law into your own hands and destroying works of art..which is what a statue is, should be acceptable.
I like to read the inscriptions and very often I'll then do more research... I love history. I like to see the good and the bad... should we really destroy these statues... I do not think so.
|
|
|
Post by patty on Jan 7, 2022 17:03:39 GMT
As I said, if the majority of locals wish it removed I have no issue with it. The positive thing to come out of the whole episode is that it has promoted discussions around the country and people can decide on what public monuments and statues they wish to retain or remove. Rog The problem with that is most people are thick, ignorant and have no idea. If you had a referendum on museums, most people would say “don’t spend public money on that boring crap, give it back to the people so they can spend it on booze, fags and drugs.” If you had a referendum on statues, most people wouldn’t be interested unless it was one of the latest ones of a Love Island Celebrity. If you had a referendum on naming a scientific research vessel, they would come up with a stupid name like “Boatie mcBoatFace”. Oh yea, they did that one already. The country cannot be run by the will of the masses, it would be horrendous. Yeah but I quite liked 'Boatie Mcboatface' I thought it was funny...maybe I fall into the Thicko category....quite happy to slot in there as long as I can smile at what I perceive to be amusing...
|
|
|
Post by ianali on Jan 7, 2022 17:03:46 GMT
What would you call it then ? Rog A public artwork, like it or loathe it, it belongs to everyone and no individual or group of individuals have the right to remove, many see it as that and care little for or against but some wish it to remain.
Their wish is just as valid, in fact more so because the status quo should always require a large majority to overthrow.
but then that's my opinion and is just as valid if not more so than those who get offended for things that happened in history
(How the hell can you be "offended" for something that happened generations ago)
It’s always surprised me how people see things so differently to others. I just can’t understand how anyone would wish to have on display, a statue of such an evil man. Others though see it as simply an historic reminder of our past. It doesn’t offend me, but I can see why it might others. People eh..
|
|
|
Post by ianali on Jan 7, 2022 17:05:42 GMT
As I said, if the majority of locals wish it removed I have no issue with it. The positive thing to come out of the whole episode is that it has promoted discussions around the country and people can decide on what public monuments and statues they wish to retain or remove. Rog The problem with that is most people are thick, ignorant and have no idea. If you had a referendum on museums, most people would say “don’t spend public money on that boring crap, give it back to the people so they can spend it on booze, fags and drugs.” If you had a referendum on statues, most people wouldn’t be interested unless it was one of the latest ones of a Love Island Celebrity. If you had a referendum on naming a scientific research vessel, they would come up with a stupid name like “Boatie mcBoatFace”. Oh yea, they did that one already. The country cannot be run by the will of the masses, it would be horrendous. Occasionally Nick, you don’t half come across as a pompous ass. No offence intended 👍
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 7, 2022 17:22:44 GMT
the problem I believe is with those today who have no concept of history and how societies have changed, and how the mores and attitudes have changed. They insist on trying to judge historical pesonalities by the mores and customs of today as opposed to the standards of their day.
To call Cyrus the Great, Caesar, Hannibal, Ragnar Lodbroek, Richard the Lionheart or Pope Clement the third as warmongers is pathetic.
To demand the removal of any public artwork displaying them would be pathetic
Were they warmongers ? of course they were ...... by the standards of today but to judge them as such and be "offended by their actions" is mind numbingly stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jan 7, 2022 17:30:39 GMT
While they are part of history, the history of such characters is airbrushed out. Statues are works of art too, but they don't need to be prominently displayed. Stick em in the far corner of the museum, with full facts, good and bad, on display.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 7, 2022 17:39:26 GMT
A public artwork, like it or loathe it, it belongs to everyone and no individual or group of individuals have the right to remove, many see it as that and care little for or against but some wish it to remain.
Their wish is just as valid, in fact more so because the status quo should always require a large majority to overthrow.
but then that's my opinion and is just as valid if not more so than those who get offended for things that happened in history
(How the hell can you be "offended" for something that happened generations ago)
It’s always surprised me how people see things so differently to others. I just can’t understand how anyone would wish to have on display, a statue of such an evil man. Others though see it as simply an historic reminder of our past. It doesn’t offend me, but I can see why it might others. People eh.. But he wasn’t an evil man in the context of his time. Evil is a man made and transient concept depending on the current zeitgeist. Just about any statue you care to mention would be of someone who disapproved of homosexuality, transgender etc. Are you going to label them all as homophobes and transphobes and tear their statues down and cancel them in JK Rowling fashion?
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 7, 2022 17:41:52 GMT
The problem with that is most people are thick, ignorant and have no idea. If you had a referendum on museums, most people would say “don’t spend public money on that boring crap, give it back to the people so they can spend it on booze, fags and drugs.” If you had a referendum on statues, most people wouldn’t be interested unless it was one of the latest ones of a Love Island Celebrity. If you had a referendum on naming a scientific research vessel, they would come up with a stupid name like “Boatie mcBoatFace”. Oh yea, they did that one already. The country cannot be run by the will of the masses, it would be horrendous. Occasionally Nick, you don’t half come across as a pompous ass. No offence intended 👍 None taken. It is a controversial point but nevertheless a true one.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Jan 7, 2022 17:56:24 GMT
So do I, well Swallownest but I think they were guilty and something very odd happened in court The point I am failing to make is ... they DID do damage unarguably ... however a jury found them not guilty having been persuaded that in the circumstances their actions amounted to having lawful excuse. I haven't said, and it is unimportant whether you or I agree or disagree. They have been processed and tried by a jury of their peers and found not guilty. Rog Fortunately it looks like its going to be allowed to be appealed and justice might yet happen according to the news
|
|
|
Post by metanoia on Jan 7, 2022 17:59:39 GMT
I DISAGREE IN CAPITALS THOUGH. Yea but I Disagree in a BIGGER FONT. So there. But does it count as you didn't do it in yellow .... ?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jan 7, 2022 18:09:46 GMT
The problem with that is most people are thick, ignorant and have no idea. If you had a referendum on museums, most people would say “don’t spend public money on that boring crap, give it back to the people so they can spend it on booze, fags and drugs.” If you had a referendum on statues, most people wouldn’t be interested unless it was one of the latest ones of a Love Island Celebrity. If you had a referendum on naming a scientific research vessel, they would come up with a stupid name like “Boatie mcBoatFace”. Oh yea, they did that one already. The country cannot be run by the will of the masses, it would be horrendous. Occasionally Nick, you don’t half come across as a pompous ass. No offence intended 👍 Occasionally?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 18:11:26 GMT
The point I am failing to make is ... they DID do damage unarguably ... however a jury found them not guilty having been persuaded that in the circumstances their actions amounted to having lawful excuse. I haven't said, and it is unimportant whether you or I agree or disagree. They have been processed and tried by a jury of their peers and found not guilty. Rog Fortunately it looks like its going to be allowed to be appealed and justice might yet happen according to the news Even if it is appealed the verdict can't be overturned nor the 'culprits' be bought back to trial (in this sort of case) - any 'appeal' will just look at the points of law. That is my understanding anyway.
I support the statue being removed, but am unhappy about the way it was removed becoming 'legal' in this type of case. Seems to me that going down the route that seems to have been taken allows anyone to do anything as long as it is for the 'perceived' 'greater good'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 18:13:23 GMT
So presumably there is now a vacant plinth with planning permission to have a statue on it.
I wonder what or who locals would choose if they were given a vote.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 7, 2022 18:16:39 GMT
Fortunately it looks like its going to be allowed to be appealed and justice might yet happen according to the news Even if it is appealed the verdict can't be overturned nor the 'culprits' be bought back to trial (in this sort of case) - any 'appeal' will just look at the points of law. That is my understanding anyway.
I support the statue being removed, but am unhappy about the way it was removed becoming 'legal' in this type of case. Seems to me that going down the route that seems to have been taken allows anyone to do anything as long as it is for the 'perceived' 'greater good'.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jan 7, 2022 18:21:00 GMT
So presumably there is now a vacant plinth with planning permission to have a statue on it. I wonder what or who locals would choose if they were given a vote. It should be someone from Bristol. How about Boycie from Only Fools and Horses?
|
|