Venus in Snow
You all saw the story and most likely shook the head. Why can’t people get it right? Why can’t they strike a balance?
Ordering the family to cover up the remarkably good, zaftig rendition of Venus simply meant the sculpture looked, as the artist said, “more objectified and sexualised” than before, something Alison is always going on about.
Discretion and common sense, two words which have flown from most dealings in the public arena, have been exemplified yet again. As one commenter wrote:
You know Comcast cable plays soft porn in the early morning just when kids are getting ready for school. MTV and regular channels play commercials with people in bed talking about the “lubricants” they use and there’s always a commercial or two about Vigra and other male enhancements and these people complain about a snow statue?
… and another added:
I try not to date women with no arms and no head.
Leaving aside the gross PCishness which really does offend me, it’s such a pity they couldn’t have perhaps run some form of liquid plastic over it to set and preserve it. Then it might have appeared in a local gallery.
Filed under: Society & human issues
Now that reminds me of the innocent ice pinnacle that was erected in my garden a few weeks ago, only for some neighbours to claim it was a phallus, although given its partial keeling over I could see what they meant: http://lifesscience.blogspot.com/2009/12/interpretation-of-sculpture.html
At least they weren’t complaining though.
That Venus one is great though, or at least it was before they tarted it up.
It sounds more like than crass prudishness than political correctness James. Still stupid
Yes but it was a very good phallus, Andrew.
Jams – perhaps.
The snow sculpture was art but after the interfering busy bodies it is now Tart!