The Great Art Debate

[Montreal Wanderer]

Sistine Chapel - Art or decoration?

http://www.vatican.va/various/cappelle/ ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Art in the service of money, aiming to hit the taste of the paymasters and succeeding...

Good job, well done, well paid... Popes satisfied... God silent on the subject...

Didn't like it myself... Did like Raphael's School of Athens a couple of rooms down the way...

The reason people like Michelangelo and Da Vinci made names for themselves that still resonate today is that they did not merely aim to hit the existing tastes of their paymasters, but they went off on frolics of their own and did things that were not in the rigid established traditions of the day (getting away with it thorugh sheer genius and chutzpah). I think the Sistine Chapel is an example of this beautiful rebellion, along with the Last Supper, the Madonna of the Rocks etc.

Having said that, seeing the Sistine Chapel in person was a pretty disappointing experience. In the daylight, absolutely crammed with tourists, and newly (gaudily?) restored, it did not blow me away.

Mostly, I agree... This is an amazing work, clearly, and Pope Julian II is to be congratulated... He commissioned it, and was well satisfied...

Well, Julian commissioned the ceiling but I think the walls were earlier.

[William the White]

Bomber Command in WWII... A hideous source of controversy - so much so that only last week a memorial was finally erected to commemorate them... Fighter command - the 'few' - had theirs decades ago...

I went to see it when I was in London on Saturday (it's in Green Park) and in the company of an RAF veteran, my wife's uncle, a Squadron Leader, now in his late 80s, who went wearing his squadron tie, and immediately found himself in conversation with others who recognised it and, really, it was all genuinely moving.

I don't want to start (another) fight on Dresden etc... We've done that one and there's not much point...

But, to talk about the art...

Here you have an art that has the imagination of Rome two millenia ago - maybe that is what they want - an art of the heroic, a celebration in stone of the handsome and brave. Portland stone pillars, and the seven members of the standard bomber crew depicted in noble pose, in absolute realist fashion, rock solid, giants reaching for the skies... Done well, good attention to detail, I asked my wife's uncle and he confirmed... By the way, the seven crew members were pilot, flight engineer, navigator, bomb aimer, rear gunner, mid upper gunner and - I can't remember - but he did, and was able to point out each one...

Surrounding this were enormous mixed messages, carved into the walls, on the left a message from Churchill saying only bombing could win the war, on the right a commemoration to the airmen of Bomber Command who lost their lives, and in the centre a dedication to those who died in the bombing campaigns of 1939-45... On the stone itself, from shakespeare, a quotation from Pericles... Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it... Ludicrous contradictions... The last, especially, since the whole point of bomber command is not defending but attacking... in the form of carpet bombing and incendiaries...

It's dreadful - just triumphalism of the most unsubtle kind with a nod - utterly misplaced in this kind of work - to liberal sensitivity. As art it has not a flicker of inspiration. It squats, shorn of pain, devoid of ambiguity, and therefore of truth, a commissioned work that wants to turn its back on history, and succeeds.

After seeing it we all went to the RAF Club opposite the monument, the uncle is a member, and, since it was a weekend, the normal dress rules didn't apply. I had a pint of Spitfire. The only beer on offer. Of course. Was nice.

[TANGODANCER]

the whole point of bomber command is not defending but attacking... in the form of carpet bombing and incendiaries...

.

Worth remembering the reality. All war is farcial, but the fact is we were in a world war and our country was under attack, Will. Hitler was marching aacross Europe and the German airforce was pounding shxt out of places like London, Liverpool, Coventry etc. But for said Bomber Command and those who gave their lives in the armed forces we might well not be discussing art, going on holidays, eating out and watching the Whites, in a free country today. A monument in their honour seems a small price to pay for that.

Just a thought.

[William the White]

the whole point of bomber command is not defending but attacking... in the form of carpet bombing and incendiaries...

.

Worth remembering the reality. All war is farcial, but the fact is we were in a world war and our country was under attack, Will. Hitler was marching aacross Europe and the German airforce was pounding shxt out of places like London, Liverpool, Coventry etc. But for said Bomber Command and those who gave their lives in the armed forces we might well not be discussing art, going on holidays, eating out and watching the Whites, in a free country today. A monument in their honour seems a small price to pay for that.

Just a thought.

I don't object to that. Just i think this one is crass.

Though I wonder if you would object to a German monument to their heroes who bombed Coventry?

[TANGODANCER]

the whole point of bomber command is not defending but attacking... in the form of carpet bombing and incendiaries...

.

Worth remembering the reality. All war is farcial, but the fact is we were in a world war and our country was under attack, Will. Hitler was marching aacross Europe and the German airforce was pounding shxt out of places like London, Liverpool, Coventry etc. But for said Bomber Command and those who gave their lives in the armed forces we might well not be discussing art, going on holidays, eating out and watching the Whites, in a free country today. A monument in their honour seems a small price to pay for that.

Just a thought.

I don't object to that. Just i think this one is crass.

Though I wonder if you would object to a German monument to their heroes who bombed Coventry?

Not being German that matters not to me. They were the offensive, under a madman determined to crush the world under his jackboots. I'm not going into a war debate Will, I've already stated it's farcial, barbaric and lunacy. No Britain wanted it, particulary those who had to fight and die, it was forced on us. Let them rest in peace and us remember their sacrifice.
We got a free country, let them have their commemoration. Small price to pay.

[thebish]

I'm not going into a war debate Will,

(he did suggest himself that we NOT debate Dresden - but you chose to.)

I've already stated it's farcial, barbaric and lunacy. No Britain wanted it, particulary those who had to fight and die, it was forced on us. Let them rest in peace and us remember their sacrifice.
We got a free country, let them have their commemoration. Small price to pay.

as WtW said - he has no objection to a memorial/commemoration - he never suggested there shouldn't be one - he even went to visit it with an RAF veteran.

this is the art thread - so surely it's an appropriate place to discuss the artistic merits of the actual memorial that has been commissioned and made - no??

[TANGODANCER]

Oh, ffs have a day off with your nit-picking Bish. There was no aggro in the conversation as I'm sure WTW realised, and no need at all for your input. Can it.

[thebish]

Oh, ffs have a day off with your nit-picking Bish. There was no aggro in the conversation as I'm sure WTW realised, and no need at all for your input. Can it.

[Bruce Rioja]

Sounds to me like it's tantamount to baiting Germans with "Two World Wars and one World Cup" at the football. Completely uncalled for.

[Worthy4England]

It's great looking back with the benefit of 70 years of hindsight and then to make some moralistic judgement around how that should be represented in today's society. I'm generally proud of everyone I've ever met that fought for our Country during that time and in my opinion it's right to acknowledge the heroics they performed. To suggest that attack isn't related to defence in some way is not in my view a sound principle.

It's a sculpture - so it's "art" - but maybe it's purpose isn't about art for art's sake, maybe it's purpose is about recognising what the people of Bomber Command had to do and celebrating their part in what they achieved. I hesitate to use the word "celebrating", but then I look back to the time, and from what I understand from people who lived through it, celebrate is what they did, when it was all over. That's not re-writing history, it's what happened. The quotes from those people who served and attended the ceremony seem pretty positive towards it - so in my mind, it's achieved what it set out to do.

It's just a pity that the political sensibilites of some folk prevented it being built a lot earlier. In the words of a bloke who was there, lived through it and fought for our freedom

"The 55,573 Bomber Command aircrew have always been in my mind. In truth, at this age, I never expected to see this Memorial being built, so it is such a relief that it has come after almost 70 years of waiting.

“The fellas are still gone but this means that families have a place to come and pay their respects, and will hopefully give younger people a better understanding of Bomber Command and the sacrifice that was made.”

If that piece of art says to this man I appreciate what he did for me, then for me it's done what it needed to.

[Wandering Willy]

Well written, Worthy.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I thought Brian Sewell's contribution to this debate was spot on in every respect. I can't find it on the Evening Standard website, but here is the text:

LONDON'S NEW MEMORIAL TO BOMBER COMMAND: IS IT RIGHT OR WRONG? -
Evening Standard (London, UK) Thursday June/07/2012


FINALLY, 67 YEARS AFTER THE END OF THE WAR, A MEMORIAL WILL BE DEDICATED LATER THIS MONTH TO 55,000 FALLEN AIRCREW. OUR WRITERS TAKE UP TWO SIDES OF A STILL PASSIONATE ARGUMENT AGAINST
BY BRIAN SEWELL

It is with mixed emotions that I salute the new memorial to the 55,000 young airmen of Bomber Command killed in the war against the Nazis. Eight when that war began, and in London throughout it, I was conditioned to applaud the gallantry of boys who, at 18, were no longer prefects at my school or players in the first XV, but men at war in ships and tanks and planes. Daily, it seemed, we hung our heads in honour of old boys scarcely older than ourselves, untimely dead while we endured the bombing, the buzz-bombs and the rockets. Mine was the tag-end of a generation that knew sudden and violent death to be the companion of the young, and unquestioningly, obediently, for King and Country, men still in their teens confronted it. It is of their valour, their steadfastness, their sacrifices that the sceptic must remind himself when he questions, 67 years after the war’s end, the purpose of this extravagant monument.

Why so late and when only a handful of veterans survive? Surely the time to honour them was all those years ago when they were golden sons lost to living parents, brothers lost to siblings, uncles lost to nephews, when they were truly and personally mourned, rather than now when only dutiful strangers mourn with the polite abstractions of communal grief?

It is so late because our memories of what they did and why they died are sullied with misgiving. It was so even during the war and it is so still. Their commanders are to blame. Air Marshals Sir Arthur (Bomber) Harris and Sir Charles Portal, inspired by the theorist Lord Cherwell — a member of the Cabinet known to Churchill as The Prof — were convinced of the effectiveness of mass “area bombing” not to destroy military targets but to render homeless large numbers of the civilian population and thus undermine German morale. As a policy its effect was greatly overestimated, but its unprecedented deliberate destruction of historic cities made the London Blitz and the devastation of Coventry seem mere barbecues.

In March and April 1942, Bomber Harris launched mass incendiary raids on Rostock and Lübeck, and in May sent a “Thousand Bomber” raid to Cologne, wiping three medieval cities from the map. These, according to the British press, were great victories, but in that year 1,400 aircraft and their crews were shot down — losses that were insupportable, but the High Command seemed not to care. By the end of 1943, 200,000 tons of bombs had been dropped on Nuremberg, Hamburg and the cities of the Ruhr, but with far less effect on the German war effort than the defeats on the Russian Front. In the last eight months of the war, when German defeat was clearly inevitable, another 150,000 tons were dropped by Bomber Command on civilian targets, killing in one single raid some 25,000 inhabitants of Berlin, and in the firestorm of Dresden (a raid of incendiary bombs first, and then of high explosives to spread the flames) the dead were estimated to have been between 25,000 and 140,000.

The destruction of Dresden and the massacre of German civilians within three months of the war’s end, when Bomber Command had total air supremacy in northern Europe, was perceived not as a strategic necessity but as an act of hatred and vengeance. The moral rectitude of mass area bombing, and its proponents, Harris, Portal and, perhaps above all, Cherwell, has ever since been questioned by those who see it as a scar on the nation’s conscience.

Unlike military memorials, Bomber Command’s does not record its victories — Dresden, Hamburg and Cologne, Lübeck and Nuremberg, are not neatly incised in its Portland stone. It is an over-long colonnade of columns meanly spaced, some 70 paces from end to end, flanking a pavilion in which, in bronze, an aircrew is gathered. It combines futile fascist bombast with ignorant disregard for the proportion and interval of its classical origins in ancient Roman architecture. Unlike Jagger’s memorial to the Artillery on the other side of Hyde Park Corner, which, surmounted by a howitzer, could only be to the Gunners, the Bombers’ is anonymous, recognisable as nothing. Far from a work of art or architecture, it could serve as a billionaire’s garden ornament. The great and good who sanctioned it should be ashamed.

© London Evening Standard

[William the White]

Well written, Sewell, and thanks for digging that one out.

I have no objection to a memorial - I went with an RAF veteran, a former squadron leader - just not one as crass as this.

[Worthy4England]

Well written, Sewell, and thanks for digging that one out.

I have no objection to a memorial - I went with an RAF veteran, a former squadron leader - just not one as crass as this.

Understand the Will.

Sewell's contribution, like many is still based on what we know now.

Even some of the "factual" references like "party X did Y 3 months before the end of the war" - yes they did - but only with the benefit of hindsight, no one knew for certain it was three months before the end of the war. No one knew with any certainty that Stalin would honour the Yalta summit for example - so it's all based on what we know now.

He also mixes "stuff" for convenience - In the bombing of Lubek, Rostock and Cologne, RAF lost 12 aircraft at Lubek with circa 300 German casualties, Rostock, reports 4 aircraft lost, 41 lost on the "thousand bomber" raid with circa 400 German casualties. He points to 1,400 aricraft losses as if they're dorectly connected. They're not - wonderful sense of hyperbole.

He then goes on to point out that the effect was much less than defeats on the Russian Front. This may be so, but we weren't fighting on the Russian Front, the Russians were. It also fails to spot how many people the Russians had angaged on the Russian front. Interestingly, the German Armaments Minister [Speer] is often quoted as saying something along the lines of Germany not being able to respond to the bombing was another "front" for Germany and the greatest lost battle of the war.


He also conveniently doesn't mention, that the V1 bombing campaigns were still going in October 1944. In the period between Jun and Oct 1944 they fired 9.500 v1's and up to March 1945 they were still lobbing over V2's. That we should have some how slackened off on the offchance they hadn't developed a nuclear warhead, is completely with the benefit of hindsight.

All I can say is thank fcuk he wasn't in charge.

[William the White]

Worthy - we've already wandered round this mulberry bush...

So... art... Have you had a look at the artwork? Here's the central section.


http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?hl=en&sa ... 0,s:0,i:74" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Do you have an opinion on it?

[Worthy4England]

Worthy - we've already wandered round this mulberry bush...

So... art... Have you had a look at the artwork? Here's the central section.


http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?hl=en&sa ... 0,s:0,i:74" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Do you have an opinion on it?

Will, I have had a look at the "art" - Green Park is often a cut through for me when I'm Darn Sarf. My initial view was it - it being the whole thing rather than just the statue - was there not to provide me with "art", but as a rememberance of some people, generally with low life expectancy, who fought for our country. I didn't spend "time" there particularly considering it as an artwork. I just said a quick Our Father and contemplated for a very short while on how very greatful I was, that in time of strife 55,000 young blokes in Bomber Command died, to keep me British (or English if you prefer).

It didn't strike me as particularly incongruous. There was a sculpture in a building that's purpose was to help me remember what individuals gave for British freedom. The sculpture for me is fine, it depicts the airmen, they looked like airmen, they look like how I would have envisaged airmen of the time to look. So as a reminder to remember what some folk gave - it all worked for me.

Had I had more than passing through time, I might have looked for incongruity (and contemplated it as art) - but that's not it's purpose (for me), and to be honest I'd have likely ignored any incongruity.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Sewell's contribution, like many is still based on what we know now.

[...]

All I can say is thank fcuk he wasn't in charge.

Sewell's just saying that, knowing what we know now, the monument evokes mixed emotions for him.

And he's explaining for the less knowledgable (I'm amongst them and grateful for his efforts) what the 'misgivings' were that meant it took 70 years to have a monument built for Bomber Command. As far as I can tell, he would have liked a monument (albeit one that isn't a hamfisted attempt at bombastic neoclassicism) much sooner.

[Worthy4England]

Sewell's contribution, like many is still based on what we know now.

[...]

All I can say is thank fcuk he wasn't in charge.

Sewell's just saying that, knowing what we know now, the monument evokes mixed emotions for him.

And he's explaining for the less knowledgable (I'm amongst them and grateful for his efforts) what the 'misgivings' were that meant it took 70 years to have a monument built for Bomber Command. As far as I can tell, he would have liked a monument (albeit one that isn't a hamfisted attempt at bombastic neoclassicism) much sooner.

I just looked at the proportion of the piece dedicated to the "sins of the fathers" and weighed that against the "case for" and counted in the last four lines that actually discuss the "art". Just looked unbalanced to me.

And then I re-read the title which said "OUR WRITERS TAKE UP TWO SIDES OF A STILL PASSIONATE ARGUMENT AGAINST"

Either way - surely it's not about whether he's happy, Will's happy, you're happy or I'm happy - it's about whether the folk in Bomber Command are happy with their memorial - and generally from the quotes I've seen from them (not that there's many surviving) - the generally seem to be chuffed to bits. Which to me says mission accomplished.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Either way - surely it's not about whether he's happy, Will's happy, you're happy or I'm happy - it's about whether the folk in Bomber Command are happy with their memorial - and generally from the quotes I've seen from them (not that there's many surviving) - the generally seem to be chuffed to bits. Which to me says mission accomplished.

As Sewell points out, there are only a handful of Bomber Command veterans left.

Anyway, as Simon Jenkins said a week or so after Sewell, when you deface one of London's parks with something like that, what is there and why it is there is a valid subject for public debate.

http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comme ... 65854.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Worthy4England]

Either way - surely it's not about whether he's happy, Will's happy, you're happy or I'm happy - it's about whether the folk in Bomber Command are happy with their memorial - and generally from the quotes I've seen from them (not that there's many surviving) - the generally seem to be chuffed to bits. Which to me says mission accomplished.

As Sewell points out, there are only a handful of Bomber Command veterans left.

Anyway, as Simon Jenkins said a week or so after Sewell, when you deface one of London's parks with something like that, what is there and why it is there is a valid subject for public debate.

http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comme ... 65854.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well if Simon Jenkins and Brian Sewell both have comments to make, then it must be true. Not that they're paid to give commentary about "stuff" of course.

If they'd built the bloody thing instead of having some "I was never there, but have some indignation to unload" debate for 70 years, then there would probably have been more of Bomber Command to actually see the thing.

I have more sympathy with Jenkins' piece - even through he manages to get in a quote in from Hitler Hastings (ex-editor of the London Evening Standard - maybe we should build a memorial for Jenkins to celebrate an OBN award) - in the sense that he's largely arguing about where the memorial is sited, and not just this one, but a whole proliferation of them, rather than particularly it's content, merit or intent - he just uses that really to give more weight to his contention that the royal parks agency and Westminster Council have sold out on the memorial front.