Fourth Plinth

[lionheart]

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

I think they should have shifts of poets and singers up there. And people playing a banjo. I’d like that.

I do think art is vital and have no objection to this piece. But it is interesting that they noted that it isn’t a straight vote. That to me sounds like then saying we chose what we wanted...and so then I wonder which of these pieces was the one they steam rollered through the process?

Interesting question.

Some of the installations on the plinth have been great and I think there is such merit in having the 'fourth plinth' as an idea that itself invites discussion of how public and symbolic spaces are used.

Objecting to an artwork simply because it features faces of Trans people seems to be actually transphobic.

It rather depends on whether you intrinsically believe that a man (or a woman for that matter) can change sex. There's gender critical but accepting of the basic concept of trans, and gender critical and rejecting the notion of anyone being able to change sex.

I'm in the latter camp. I'm black and to me this is the same as celebrating a sculpture of white people in blackface.

The term 'phobic' is also way overused. If I go to trafalgar square I'll go and look at this sculpture and treat it with respect as I would also any self identifying trans person, but agree with it? Celebrate it? No.

My right.

People were quite vocal about the statue of Alison Lapper - some were really nasty too. I bet you anyone who even says if this one ‘it’s not quite my cup of tea’ will feel the full force of a twitter storm.

Maybe it’s more a social commentary than I thought then 🤔

Mermoose I think you make good points about the content and impact
of the work, and points with which I agree.
And your view is very different from any implication that there is an issue with the work featuring trans people per se…which I took, possibly mistakenly, from the fact that it is in FWR.

DysonSphere I do not think humans can change sex. I think gender is a construct. But one that people have either played with or have recognised within their identity. Perceived levels of masculinity and femininity.
Butch / Femme
Clones / Queens
Girly / Tomboy
Etc.

Trans people have existed and lived lives for generations, and are not all the same. Trans friends and colleagues are not the same as TRAs and the vitriolic spite on Twitter. Yes, phobic is overused, but any objection to representation of trans people simply because they are trans is prejudice, to my mind.

Very mistakenly.

It's here because the debates about gender which have happened have never just been about politics but also culture and questions about representation.

I think it also came up before when the competition and there was a brief discussion about the fact that the faces selected were from around the world ... if I remember correctly, a question about which faces would be chosen and why ... (a bit vague but it's late).

So, if the artist is good it will be 850 male faces because without make up none of them even look vaguely female.
99% of transwomen don't even look like women with make up.

It's just a monument to the vanity of transwomen.

I think it makes for an interesting art work and definitely subject for debate, although probably not in the way they intend.
Instead of a more realistic demographic split that shows the huge increase in non-binary female people and trans men, the piece shows proportionally far more trans women, TW sex workers and TW from Brazil than are actually representative of the world wide trans experience.
As a piece of art, it speaks volumes about the propensity of both artists, politicians and activists to use the experiences of a tiny demographic to misrepresent the whole.
Add that they possibly selected the artwork itself ahead of others with more votes and it speaks volumes about the nature of what 'trans' means in current culture.
I'm actually glad they picked it. It's definitely a debate-worthy subject for the fourth plinth although I don't think it says what they think it does.
The nature of the discussion around this whole issue is changing so incredibly fast that I'll be very interested to see how the media depicts it by the time it actually does go up.

there was a brief discussion about the fact that the faces selected were from around the world

From the Guardian article: Her hope is that most of the [trans]women depicted will live in the UK and will recognise their faces

Definitely using the experiences of a tiny demographic to misrepresent the whole.

Art does not have to reflect truth. But this isn't art, this is propaganda.

Despite it being propaganda I don't object to this piece of tosh being put on public display. (Calling it tosh is not transphobia, because it is just as much tosh as the current thing on display is tosh.) having this misrepresentation of trans lives on display will legitimise debate about it and the claims it makes. More sunlight. "Art is Truth - No Debate!" No debate about art? I think not.

Is it all trans Women faces then?

Yes. the form is also worth noting:

'Meanwhile, Teresa Margolles’s proposal is to show 850 plaster masks depicting and made by trans people in London in a cubic structure inspired by form of a Tzompantli, a Mesoamerican skull rack “used to display war captives or sacrifice victims”, according to the official statement. Both a gesture of defiance and a reflection of overlooked or under-represented communities in public art and monuments, Margolles’s plaster masks would erode as a result of London’s weather and ultimately disappear.'

www.theartnewspaper.com/news/fourth-plinth-2021

Objecting to an artwork simply because it features faces of Trans people seems to be actually transphobic.

I object to the fact that there will be significantly more transwomen's faces represented than women in this form while this is up. I don't think that's transphobic, I think it's womanphobic to ignore the opportunity to represent more women.

Whatever anyone thinks of it as an artwork, it is an artwork, not a public service message, a marketing image, educational material etc. I do not think that artists should always concern themselves with ‘representation’.

And plenty of non-TRA Trans people who understand the position of sec based rights do experience prejudice, discrimination and hate simply for being gender non conforming.

What free expression highlights is that the right of artists such as Jess de Wahls who make their work around female imagery must be fought for and protected and not silenced. The censorship she experienced from the RA was outrageous and against what should be the core concern of an arts institution: free expression for artists.

Silencing the opposition leads us down a dangerous cul de sac.

Commenting on and critiquing the work is the most valuable response, IMO.

I do not think that artists should always concern themselves with ‘representation’.

I agree that's not an artist's responsibility, but I do think it's the responsibility of those who commission art for the public. And for the record, I'm not censoring anyone, I'm just fucked off about it. As are most people on this thread I imagine.

Fair points, LetsTalkBoutSex.