Fourth Plinth

[lionheart]

www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/jul/05/faces-of-850-trans-people-to-follow-anticolonial-rebel-on-fourth-plinth

It looks like ravioli.

We can but hope the British weather does its work quickly….

On Sky too

news.sky.com/story/faces-of-850-transgender-people-and-anti-colonial-rebel-to-be-displayed-on-trafalgar-squares-fourth-plinth-12349137

I feel trolled on a daily basis.

The plinth has displayed various artworks, some of which are not my cup of tea and some of which I think are beautiful - this one for example:
www.irishnews.com/magazine/entertainment/2018/03/28/news/trafalgar-square-fourth-plinth-sculpture-unveiled-1290057/

I voted for Samson Kambalu's work. Reading about it and the significance was deeply moving for me.

But I'm confused why this article seems to trumpet the Margolles work over his?

Surely the headline should follow the timeline, Kambalu's work NEXT, then the trans piece?

Interesting little line about how the choices weren't necessarily the ones that got most votes. I'd love to see the true totals.

@MondayYogurt

I voted for Samson Kambalu's work. Reading about it and the significance was deeply moving for me.

But I'm confused why this article seems to trumpet the Margolles work over his?

Surely the headline should follow the timeline, Kambalu's work NEXT, then the trans piece?

Me to, on all counts.

I'd not seen the ice cream...
From the ridiculous to the sublime to the ... hmm. Nuff said.

I don't understand all the headlines that don't mention Samson Kambalu's work at all. That work is going to be displayed next, not the one by Teresa Margolles which isn't due to be displayed until 2024! Talk about pre-empting.

How curious - I read this on the BBC Website this morning and I distinctly remember the article saying that the majority of masks would be trans people who worked in the sex industry. So my question then was are there that many trans people working in the sex industry? But the article then said they were from London and 'other countries' which makes me think it will be the likes of Brazil where it is more common

But then the curious thing is, I've just looked and the article has been completely re-written with far more prominance given to Samson Kambula's sculpture and those details missing

But then the curious thing is, I've just looked and the article has been completely re-written with far more prominance given to Samson Kambula's sculpture and those details missing

Well good. Quite outrageous that the sculpture up first - and such a good one too - wasn't getting coverage.

Her expectation is that London’s weather will mean the work deteriorates and fades away, leaving “a kind of anti-monument”.

Its plaster of paris so its not going to fade away, its going to run down the plinth.

So?

Artworks have been made from casts of many vaginas, Marc Quinn’s blood, images of disabled people’s bodies, what on earth is the problem with faces of Trans people? How does that take away sex based rights?

I am GC. Also anti-censorship. Objecting to an artwork simply because it features faces of Trans people seems to be actually transphobic.

@MarianneUnfaithful couldn’t agree more!!

I have a suspicion the original press release that the fourth plinth commission sent out will have lead the skewed coverage...

@ErrolTheDragon

But then the curious thing is, I've just looked and the article has been completely re-written with far more prominance given to Samson Kambula's sculpture and those details missing

Well good. Quite outrageous that the sculpture up first - and such a good one too - wasn't getting coverage.

Wish I could compare the two. It just seems so weird.

I hope its a meaningful representation of trans people and does justice to the subjects and the plinth. Her work is challenging I believe but I hope it inspires.

I have no objection to artwork representing trans people. However - maybe this is also down to poor reporting - there seems to be a certain degree of misrepresentation going on in this piece.

Anyway - delighted with the first choice.

MarianneUnfaithful

I am GC. Also anti-censorship. Objecting to an artwork simply because it features faces of Trans people seems to be actually transphobic.

I agree with you that it's transphobic to object to artwork simply because it depicts trans people. Personally I don't think it's good to constantly depict trans people as being somehow in danger or doomed to tragic and short lives, which is the impression I got of the artwork from the articles linked. Jesse Singal has written about this here: jessesingal.substack.com/p/its-immoral-to-tell-american-trans. He's discussing murder rates in the US but it holds true for the UK also.

I think the portrayal of trans people as victims has at least two bad effects: one is how this affects young people who identify as trans. Many are already struggling with mental health problems and culture telling them they are the objects of persecution - in a way that distorts the facts - doesn't help. The second bad effect it has is that 'trans people are the most persecuted section of society' is the reason nobody is supposed to debate any aspect of gender, even where it harms trans people themselves, as in the case of shoddy medical standards.

Having said that, I wouldn't support any calls to censor this piece. I just think that criticism of it is not necessarily transphobic - though I can also see how some criticism of it probably is.

Another example of erasing women by the use of the word 'people'.

For her work 850 Improntas (850 Imprints), Margolles will take casts of the faces of trans people from London and around the world.

Fair enough you think - transmen and transwomen, enbies and other gender-nonconformers: female and male will be represented.

But, no. Follow the link at the bottom of the page and you'll see it's all about TW. Yet again males are the only people that matter.

@MarianneUnfaithful

So?

Artworks have been made from casts of many vaginas, Marc Quinn’s blood, images of disabled people’s bodies, what on earth is the problem with faces of Trans people? How does that take away sex based rights?

I am GC. Also anti-censorship. Objecting to an artwork simply because it features faces of Trans people seems to be actually transphobic.

There is a difference between objecting to it as a piece of art, and objecting to it being given a prominent position on the fourth plinth. This latter, bearing in mind the vitriol in the current debate, does seem to be trolling women. If you believe rights are like pie, as many GC women do, then giving more air time to activists who want to push the idea that trans people are the majorly hard-done-to majority, and I assume the artist does think this (if she's gender critical I take it all back), the decision is trolling women - from a major public place in the nation's capital.

Objecting to that is not the same as objecting to it as a work of art itself. I think we get transphobia thrown at us enough without looking for it where it is not.

from the Telegraph:

"Future historians, looking back on our febrile era, will, I fancy, designate this as the moment when identity politics and British art jumped the shark."

www.telegraph.co.uk/art/what-to-see/fourth-plinth-winners-focus-identity-politics-feels-like-marker/

I always think of the fourth plinth being in reserve for David Attenborough when he goes, hopefully not for a long time yet.

Some of the entries for this were gorgeous!

I knew which would win obv

It’s plaster of Paris? So it will end up how we all expected the large ice cream cone to end up? Like a large pile of bird poo? How very odd.

I’m my professional opinion - it’s butt ugly. And I can confidently say that - ‘cos I went to art school (hahahahah).

"Future historians, looking back on our febrile era, will, I fancy, designate this as the moment when identity politics and British art jumped the shark."

www.telegraph.co.uk/art/what-to-see/fourth-plinth-winners-focus-identity-politics-feels-like-marker/

I dunno, looking at the previous fourth sculptures the writer liked, I don't really like them either . I like other work by the same artists though - David Shrigley has some lovely funny artwork. I wonder is it the space itself - it's so significant a spot that both artists and judges lose their sense of subtlety when thinking about what should go there?