Today I've readen a small article about a statue of a nude & pregnant
Britney Spears that gives to birth on a bear-fur...
see: http://www.caplakesting.com/Warning link contains pictures of a nude
statue
The Idea behind: Pro-Life . I've read the large thread pro/contra abortion here
at minitokyo and I see how large the number of people is who are completly
against abortion. I'm not much into church and to be honest, those radical
pro-birth christians (especially from the US) are scaring me! But the pro and
contra discussion of being for or against abortion shall not continue in here, I
simply wanted to ask, what you people do think of this...
For me this statue is simply kitsch! Celebrating life with this doggy-style
statue that reminds me of one of those porn works by Jeff Koons looks simply
tasteless to me. Between Britneys spreaden legs, you will see the head of the
baby on the way out of her body, thats why some people do belive this
controversial statue is also pornographical (giving birth is porn? More
stupid!). This 1:1 statue is simply ugly, and this Pro-Life thing behind it:
celebrating life, being against abortion disturbs me alot. I do not dislike this
because I am pro-abortion, I am against it, because it is ugly and kitschy.
Using so-called art like this for propaganda is bad. This statue also reminds me
of the "Perfect Human" Statues of Arno Breker who became the most
wanted sculptor in the Third Reich...
Please tell me, what you do think about this sculpure or the idea for using art
like this for the Pro-Life thing...
The pose is a bit unbecoming, and this sculpure does not looks like misses
spears, more like some sort of alien- reminds me of Species.
After all its a trashy litte dust catcher. The only three reasons why people are
talking about it are: It shall look like this wicked female popsinger, this
wicked female popsinger is pregnant, nude and spreads it's legs on a teddy fur
and this pregnant wicked nude female popsinger spreads it's legs on a teddy fur
in honor to life and pro birth. Smart Gallery!- Today you need a good background
story to make average art become well known around the world!
If I were Britney, I would sue the heck out of that guy.
Okay, we get it...yay for Britney having a baby when she is younger than most
celebrities. But that is just wrong.
I know a lot of art fans would say "there is nothing wrong with the human
body!" and all that, and I believe that too, but this was obviously just
for publicity.
Okay, firstly and for the record; Sean Preston was delivered through a two
minute Caesarean section and not an elaborate birth scene. Britney's career has
very much faded from prominence with her marriage to Kevin, and the fathering of
his children, and the entire thing just stinks of a last ditch effort at a
publicity stunt, or a selfless act of celebrity worship as opposed to having
anything to do with a pro-life stance (other than watching the reproduction of
another spoiled celebrity).
Not that I care anyway. Abortion's a non-issue and pop sucks. One's a
distraction toward more pressing matters that we should dedicate ourselves to
instead, the other's just a bunch of no-talent hacks running around on stage
with their synthesizer crews and their studio-doctored voices, and their
hired-on status by music companies to make remotely catchy little tunes, and
generate profit through saturating the market with mass mediocrity.
Maybe if you were to make a statue of Jimi Hendrix or Frank Zappa, or display a
sculpture of one of the motifs from a Pink Floyd album (people that actually
knew or still know how to play), I'd be more interested. But, people seem to
flock to what's trendy instead of anything that has any musical value.
-Les Claypool slap-bass attack on the statue, causing vibro-implosion to it, and
stuffs.-
If one would ask me, personally, Brittany Spears needed money to live the
"so called celeb life", so she was asked by this "artist" to
make a statue of her. What a ploy by the Pro Life folks to make noise and for
the celeb losers to make "noises" because they have noo real musical
talent that makes a person think, not "just enjoy the music"
They are more interested in making "musical junk", just so they can be
noticed by the corporate masters who wield the dollars in their faces (and
sadly, in our faces as well !)
I must admit, to hear this and read it, this reminds me of a movie titled
"My Life as a DOG". Similar situation of an artist/ mother and child.
LoL !
ok.... that just made me loose my apetite..... she looks like wanting to
procreate, not give birth, if you get my alusion... anyway, that's kitsch all
day long...
don't wanna know how her breasts look in reality, but the statue's breasts look
awefull to me.....*shudder*
:puke:
yea a statue is just more provocative then what its cause sent for...
And to choose a pop star that always shows up in skimpy out fit as its statue?
Why yea that just spice up teenagers fantasy nowadays, dont they?
Quote by KrawczykI feel like making a
sculpture of my own, smashing this one, and replacing it. It's THAT poorly done.
you mean you have one that has you posing like that ..jk
y a pose like that? it could give people the wrong image.
LOL
nah, I mean, like every other fervent pro-lifer he seems to have never seen an
actual birth happen. wtf makes him think it's like taking a crap? She looks like
she's imitating the bear she's sitting on by firing the kid out her ass! If my
shits were like that I would rather die of an impacted bowel.
Also her face is pretty darn freakish.
This statue can just be viewed as an enourmous reminder of what the general
public will allow to be called art and even more so contravercial.Firstly I dont
consider this artwork controvecial because i dont consider it art..... A
sculpture of po-po-zao's sloppy seconds grunting as she positions herself
doggy-style preparing to squat-drop the mutant child of their unholy union cant
be considered anything other than an insult to artists that actually work for a
living....>< >< Give me an artist like Guy Aitchison or Michelle
Wortman and their incredible visions into the other side. Not someone who
thought Britney's flappy vagina would make a good lobby sculpture....put in a
fountain for fuck-sake
Quote by KytelThis statue can just be
viewed as an enourmous reminder of what the general public will allow to be
called art and even more so contravercial.Firstly I dont consider this artwork
controvecial because i dont consider it art..... A sculpture of po-po-zao's
sloppy seconds grunting as she positions herself doggy-style preparing to
squat-drop the mutant child of their unholy union cant be considered anything
other than an insult to artists that actually work for a living....><
>< Give me an artist like Guy Aitchison or Michelle Wortman and their
incredible visions into the other side. Not someone who thought Britney's flappy
vagina would make a good lobby sculpture....put in a fountain for fuck-sake
Fight For Art
www. AlexGrey.com
The True Artist
totally agree...it's digusting..it's bloody Britney Spears for god's sake...wtf.
I agree with aiza
I mean no one would
have appricated that,
if it was you, would you?
The media and publicity
is just to over drawn and
accumilated to certain celebs.
and should concetrate on the more
fine area's of important things in life.
Today I've readen a small article about a statue of a nude & pregnant Britney Spears that gives to birth on a bear-fur...
see:
http://www.caplakesting.com/ Warning link contains pictures of a nude statue
The Idea behind: Pro-Life . I've read the large thread pro/contra abortion here at minitokyo and I see how large the number of people is who are completly against abortion. I'm not much into church and to be honest, those radical pro-birth christians (especially from the US) are scaring me! But the pro and contra discussion of being for or against abortion shall not continue in here, I simply wanted to ask, what you people do think of this...
For me this statue is simply kitsch! Celebrating life with this doggy-style statue that reminds me of one of those porn works by Jeff Koons looks simply tasteless to me. Between Britneys spreaden legs, you will see the head of the baby on the way out of her body, thats why some people do belive this controversial statue is also pornographical (giving birth is porn? More stupid!). This 1:1 statue is simply ugly, and this Pro-Life thing behind it: celebrating life, being against abortion disturbs me alot. I do not dislike this because I am pro-abortion, I am against it, because it is ugly and kitschy.
Using so-called art like this for propaganda is bad. This statue also reminds me of the "Perfect Human" Statues of Arno Breker who became the most wanted sculptor in the Third Reich...
Please tell me, what you do think about this sculpure or the idea for using art like this for the Pro-Life thing...
Actually, the artist got calls from several Pro-Life groups telling him it was not helping their cause, as well.
Personally, I thought that it was just tacky. And who gives birth in that position?!
A lot of people do. Although it looks awkward, it is a common practice in ancient asian countries. heh...pretty interesting.....
The pose is a bit unbecoming, and this sculpure does not looks like misses spears, more like some sort of alien- reminds me of Species.
After all its a trashy litte dust catcher. The only three reasons why people are talking about it are: It shall look like this wicked female popsinger, this wicked female popsinger is pregnant, nude and spreads it's legs on a teddy fur and this pregnant wicked nude female popsinger spreads it's legs on a teddy fur in honor to life and pro birth. Smart Gallery!- Today you need a good background story to make average art become well known around the world!
Yea, that statue is ugly, but since it's art, it may look amazing to others.
Art? I saw it in the newspaper today, and didn't like it. Okay, I recognize that it's against abortion, but there are other ways.
i hate britney, but the staute is not bad! it is art! ^^
I think that if its Pro life... It`s good.
But I hate Britney... why not Madonna? lol x 1.000.000.000.000.-
If I were Britney, I would sue the heck out of that guy.
Okay, we get it...yay for Britney having a baby when she is younger than most celebrities. But that is just wrong.
I know a lot of art fans would say "there is nothing wrong with the human body!" and all that, and I believe that too, but this was obviously just for publicity.
-Lights up a Dutch Masters and takes a drag.-
Okay, firstly and for the record; Sean Preston was delivered through a two minute Caesarean section and not an elaborate birth scene. Britney's career has very much faded from prominence with her marriage to Kevin, and the fathering of his children, and the entire thing just stinks of a last ditch effort at a publicity stunt, or a selfless act of celebrity worship as opposed to having anything to do with a pro-life stance (other than watching the reproduction of another spoiled celebrity).
Not that I care anyway. Abortion's a non-issue and pop sucks. One's a distraction toward more pressing matters that we should dedicate ourselves to instead, the other's just a bunch of no-talent hacks running around on stage with their synthesizer crews and their studio-doctored voices, and their hired-on status by music companies to make remotely catchy little tunes, and generate profit through saturating the market with mass mediocrity.
Maybe if you were to make a statue of Jimi Hendrix or Frank Zappa, or display a sculpture of one of the motifs from a Pink Floyd album (people that actually knew or still know how to play), I'd be more interested. But, people seem to flock to what's trendy instead of anything that has any musical value.
-Les Claypool slap-bass attack on the statue, causing vibro-implosion to it, and stuffs.-
-Acyx
If one would ask me, personally, Brittany Spears needed money to live the "so called celeb life", so she was asked by this "artist" to make a statue of her. What a ploy by the Pro Life folks to make noise and for the celeb losers to make "noises" because they have noo real musical talent that makes a person think, not "just enjoy the music"
They are more interested in making "musical junk", just so they can be noticed by the corporate masters who wield the dollars in their faces (and sadly, in our faces as well !)
I must admit, to hear this and read it, this reminds me of a movie titled "My Life as a DOG". Similar situation of an artist/ mother and child. LoL !
ok.... that just made me loose my apetite..... she looks like wanting to procreate, not give birth, if you get my alusion... anyway, that's kitsch all day long...
don't wanna know how her breasts look in reality, but the statue's breasts look awefull to me.....*shudder*
:puke:
I feel like making a sculpture of my own, smashing this one, and replacing it. It's THAT poorly done.
you mean you have one that has you posing like that
..jk
y a pose like that? it could give people the wrong image.
yea a statue is just more provocative then what its cause sent for...
And to choose a pop star that always shows up in skimpy out fit as its statue? Why yea that just spice up teenagers fantasy nowadays, dont they?
LOL
Also her face is pretty darn freakish.
This statue can just be viewed as an enourmous reminder of what the general public will allow to be called art and even more so contravercial.Firstly I dont consider this artwork controvecial because i dont consider it art..... A sculpture of po-po-zao's sloppy seconds grunting as she positions herself doggy-style preparing to squat-drop the mutant child of their unholy union cant be considered anything other than an insult to artists that actually work for a living....>< >< Give me an artist like Guy Aitchison or Michelle Wortman and their incredible visions into the other side. Not someone who thought Britney's flappy vagina would make a good lobby sculpture....put in a fountain for fuck-sake
Fight For Art
www. AlexGrey.com
The True Artist
no kidding, if you want to make something repugnant and disgusting...It should at at least be artistically so!
Man I love the Laughing Vampire.
totally agree...it's digusting..it's bloody Britney Spears for god's sake...wtf.
I agree with aiza
I mean no one would
have appricated that,
if it was you, would you?
The media and publicity
is just to over drawn and
accumilated to certain celebs.
and should concetrate on the more
fine area's of important things in life.
jajajajajajajaja... now everybody can have a statue... but, well, it's not bad at all
I dont know that to say, I think it's funny..LOL...