Alison Lapper Pregnant

[monkeytrousers]

I think it's great! link

I saw it yesterday - I suppose it is great in that it has provoked a lot of discussion, about heroism, about disability, about public art - and yet I don't like it. It has no character.

I know it's off the subject, and I know I am going to sound naive about art, but I do think it's a strange concept that the artist didn't actually do any of the carving himself. I am quite impressed by some of the other work he has done, and his ideas are great but where does the credit begin and end?

we already had a statue of a disabled person in Traflagar Square.

plaster of paris? is not sculpted?

No, it was sculpted from marble by Italian sculptors. The artist made the moulds.

It is sculpted, but he didn't actually do the sculpting himself - he employed Italian sculptors to do it for him

so how does he get credit?

I'm dim about this sort of thing?

His concept, I guess (I am feeling a bit dim about it too).

because he came up with the concept and design, even if he didn't actually sculpt it himself ... ?

It is weird, though, isn't it- what if the sculptors had been really crap?

It's not unusual for artists to employ craftsman in various ways. Even Rodin did not do all of the carving himself.

But he employed well-established Italian sculptors who are experts!

not my kind of 'artist' then I'm afraid!

Imagine finding out Michelangelo had the local painters and decorators in at the Sistine Chapel!

Damien Hirst didn't do any (or all) of the painting himself for his recent exhibition of photo-realistic paintings

maybe he did!!!

You are joking?

sorry, I find that shocking!

I know, spacedonkey, and I realise he wouldn't have employed rubbish sculptors, I am just playing devil's advocate

but however brilliant they are - it wasn't him!

end of!

sorry tamum, no tone of voice on here!

Perhaps it's akin to the role of a musician or conductor in relation to a composer ... ?

Joolstoo, Michelangelo did employ decorators!

That's a really good analogy spacedonkey, makes a lot of sense

depends how you rate conductors versus musicians

I mean any one member of an orchestra could entertain you but the conductor on his own?

just playing that old da again

Never mind who did it - I'm sure they've donated all their fees to an organisation or charity that works with disabled people. Hmmmm...

I just feel a big fat "so what" whenever I hear about the sculpture. Not living in London, the chances of my seeing it are nil, and I'm already perfectly able to celebrate diversity without being told that I should through something I'll never see.

like the Famous blue stone of Galveston

It's very common in art to employ craftsmen to do alot of the donkeywork. Like Anorak says, Michelangelo did too. Many great artists would only bother to paint whatever them considered the important part of the composition (which was their own) and hired lesser painters to do the backgrounds and scenery. Modern artists turned the whole snobbery and hierarchy of classicism on its head from the mid 19th century onwards. Now you can just do what you like. Banksy is an artist that can't paint or draw, he's still brilliant though.