Taking Down Statues in Ireland



StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,100
You said she should not avert her eyes from the light.

You want a load of blind giant statues do you? 😁

No, I said:

The Statue of Liberty holds up her head. She is a radiant beacon. Liberty doesn't avert her eyes from the light.
 

omgsquared

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
646
Another good question might be to ask how many people have ever had their opinion sought on whose statue should appear where? Vanishingly few people, and these things are always arranged by the elite and their secretariats, usually at public expense.

No one in my lifetime has ever asked my opinion on whether a large spike should appear in the middle of our capital city. I don't recall getting much of a choice in that.
and what a horrible waste of money is that spike, Once again ordinary Irish people have come to the rescue and added some semblance of normality to the OIRISH OIRT forum , calling it the Stiletto in the Ghetto and others, The tart with the cart, The floozey in the Jacuzzi, There is the real litery art.
 

edg

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
14,555
and what a horrible waste of money is that spike, Once again ordinary Irish people have come to the rescue and added some semblance of normality to the OIRISH OIRT forum , calling it the Stiletto in the Ghetto and others, The tart with the cart, The floozey in the Jacuzzi, There is the real litery art.
Every time I see that stupid spike I think of Vlad the Impaler ruler of Wallachia!
 

edg

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
14,555
No, I said:

The Statue of Liberty holds up her head. She is a radiant beacon. Liberty doesn't avert her eyes from the light.
Thats exactly what I thought you said.

Both the Shelbourne statues and the statue of liberty both look away from the lights they hold.

Anyway, it's not up for debate anymore that the Shelbourne statues represent very wealthy and powerful women and not slaves. If that's what your point is.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
11,216
I have seen more chains, bondage gear on some of our local goths walking the streets of many Irish cities., often tied to noses as well as ears , Should they be advised as to the memories of slavery , colonialism that these images conjure,
Yes, Goths are now racists. You have permission to attack them.
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
53,536
Thats exactly what I thought you said.

Both the Shelbourne statues and the statue of liberty both look away from the lights they hold.

Anyway, it's not up for debate anymore that the Shelbourne statues represent very wealthy and powerful women and not slaves. If that's what your point is.
Very seldom we agree.
  • These statues were not representations of slaves, or of the submissive East.
  • They are not, strictly speaking, even Victorian or British. Being French, they are of what is known as French Empire Style of the reign of Napoleon III.
  • The French commenced building the Suez Canal in 1859, and for the 1860s decade, anything Egyptian was "in". The statues are from that period.
  • One artwork from that period has stood the test of time. Verdi wrote Aida, an opera in which the title character is an Ehtiopian slave, with whom a warrior of Egypt has fallen in love. It was commissioned by the Khedive to be performed at the opening of the canal. Of course Aida is actually a princess, but the statues do not represent her, but more the idea of the romantic, opulent East.
  • The posture of the statues is demure and dignified, and they are not scantily clothed, as a representation of a slave would be at that time.
  • My opinion is these women are holding up torches to light the way to the magical East, a place of legendary wealth and luxury.
My opinion is a good as anyone elses!

Good supporting article in the Irish Times Magazine today by Hugh Linehan.
 

edg

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
14,555
Very seldom we agree.
  • These statues were not representations of slaves, or of the submissive East.
  • They are not, strictly speaking, even Victorian or British. Being French, they are of what is known as French Empire Style of the reign of Napoleon III.
  • The French commenced building the Suez Canal in 1859, and for the 1860s decade, anything Egyptian was "in". The statues are from that period.
  • One artwork from that period has stood the test of time. Verdi wrote Aida, an opera in which the title character is an Ehtiopian slave, with whom a warrior of Egypt has fallen in love. It was commissioned by the Khedive to be performed at the opening of the canal. Of course Aida is actually a princess, but the statues do not represent her, but more the idea of the romantic, opulent East.
  • The posture of the statues is demure and dignified, and they are not scantily clothed, as a representation of a slave would be at that time.
  • My opinion is these women are holding up torches to light the way to the magical East, a place of legendary wealth and luxury.
My opinion is a good as anyone elses!

Good supporting article in the Irish Times Magazine today by Hugh Linehan.
I have liked many of your posts and find you to be a decent poster.

I find ourselves in agreement on lots of things!

Interesting post btw.
 

Mercurial

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
94,010
Ah yes. A well trained Adeptus knows all too well how the entire canon of Western "History" is but a fictional story woven by white supremacists to justify "White Supremacy" and the oppression of Trans Women (who are women). And they know all this without ever straying further than Lanzarote where they were dragged by their parents on the last time they traveled. I think very few people who frequent these pages realize just how extreme and indoctrinated an acolyte the bauld Murk is. The humanities churn out legions of people like Merc who then enter life and help bring about changes such as we're seeing. Are you all enjoying it yet? It's just beginning. Philosophy was a doddle. History was easy. Also a done deal. Biology is the current target (Men are Women) soon to be complete and maths and physics are next. Oh! How our societies will thrive under the "other ways of knowing" when applied to engineering and science!

On a serious note, those of you with young kids in school pay attention to the curriculum. For my sins, I reside at the woke equivalent of Mount Doom in Mordor (Seattle) but it's coming your way and fast.
We get it, Kevin. You don't like religion and brown people.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
35,702
Glad I didn't get my knickers in a twist seeing as I fell for the story of the slaves in manacles, I wonder will they put them back or sell them to a rich art lover?
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,100
Thats exactly what I thought you said.

Both the Shelbourne statues and the statue of liberty both look away from the lights they hold.

Anyway, it's not up for debate anymore that the Shelbourne statues represent very wealthy and powerful women and not slaves. If that's what your point is.

No, it wasn't. Re-read what you wrote - carefully.

Further, I haven't a clue what this post is saying - a bit of a jumble.
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,100
Very seldom we agree.
  • These statues were not representations of slaves, or of the submissive East.
  • They are not, strictly speaking, even Victorian or British. Being French, they are of what is known as French Empire Style of the reign of Napoleon III.
  • The French commenced building the Suez Canal in 1859, and for the 1860s decade, anything Egyptian was "in". The statues are from that period.
  • One artwork from that period has stood the test of time. Verdi wrote Aida, an opera in which the title character is an Ehtiopian slave, with whom a warrior of Egypt has fallen in love. It was commissioned by the Khedive to be performed at the opening of the canal. Of course Aida is actually a princess, but the statues do not represent her, but more the idea of the romantic, opulent East.
  • The posture of the statues is demure and dignified, and they are not scantily clothed, as a representation of a slave would be at that time.
  • My opinion is these women are holding up torches to light the way to the magical East, a place of legendary wealth and luxury.
My opinion is a good as anyone elses!

Good supporting article in the Irish Times Magazine today by Hugh Linehan.

Great! You agree with me, they have romanticised an idea about the East, which included slavery. In short, they are slaves, but romanticised.
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,100
The statues depict aristocratic women, not slaves.


Edg,

This is what I think it's about. I don't believe hotel management removed the statues on a whim (read Kyle Leyden's Letter to Ed) - they had advice.


#638
Taking Down Statues in Ireland

The four statues were all different according to people who actually viewed them.

These 2 close-up flickr photos were taken years prior to the controversy.

The slave girls were positioned at either end of the hotel's facade. I think the hotel management took the statues down after being informed they were idealised slave girls - even though they have jewellery (e.g. head band, 'anklets').

Close up of slave girl's face on a corner of Shelbourne hotel ~


https://flic.kr/p/deC1dt

Princess


https://flic.kr/p/deBYZZ


#640
Taking Down Statues in Ireland

Agree. But I can now understand why the statues have been warehoused. The slave girls' jewellery romanticised slavery, making it appear innocuous. We'll hear more about this.

Kyle Leyden
Removal of statues from the Shelbourne
 

edg

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
14,555

Finbar10

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
3,000
Glad I didn't get my knickers in a twist seeing as I fell for the story of the slaves in manacles, I wonder will they put them back or sell them to a rich art lover?
The Herald was quoting some auctioneer that the four of them collectively could be worth something like €200-300k on sale (could be a bit exaggerated, but still they seem to be worth something alright). Though I guess selling off some of the fixtures and fittings of a protected building could have complications, e.g. IIRC there have been legal cases over those Harry Clarke stained-glass windows in Bewley's over the years (that is, Bewley's Oriental Café, yet another example of Oriential fetishization ;) ). Though I suspect those Harry Clarke windows would be worth many multiples of €200k.
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,100
I agree they didn't take it down on a whim. I'm just saying that the people who took it down because they thought it depicted slaves were proven to be incorrect by historians.


Edg,

What historians (plural)? We only have Kyle Leyden's point of view. He thinks "the lavish draping and jewellery of the Shelbourne statue clearly demonstrate it is not, nor was it ever intended to be read as a slave." But I (Starry) think the hotel management was informed the statues were idealised slaves, that is, the slave girls' jewellery romanticised slavery, making it appear innocuous.

I've read Hugh Linehan's rehash of previous articles, Wiki, etc - nothing new to see here:

Shelbourne statues: Will we ever see them on St Stephen’s Green again?
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,100
The Herald was quoting some auctioneer that the four of them collectively could be worth something like €200-300k on sale (could be a bit exaggerated, but still they seem to be worth something alright). Though I guess selling off some of the fixtures and fittings of a protected building could have complications, e.g. IIRC there have been legal cases over those Harry Clarke stained-glass windows in Bewley's over the years (that is, Bewley's Oriental Café, yet another example of Oriential fetishization ;) ). Though I suspect those Harry Clarke windows would be worth many multiples of €200k.

By Caroline O'Doherty
August 01 2020 02:30 AM
Shelbourne statues could sell for up to €300k

"Art historian Kyle Leyden argued the girls were not slaves as the original catalogue they were bought from listed them as 'Negresse', which he claimed was simply a French term for an African woman.​
"However, historian Donal Hassett said this was a colonial term used by those who oppressed and plundered Africa.​
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
11,216
Okay BLM people, I have petrol, matches and an angry mob. After all the research on the origin of a statue, are we still offended? If not, we will have to enquire about every other statue until we find a reason to be offended.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom