That Statue - again!

[Ding-Dong]

I suspect I'm going to get hammered here, but don't really care - the woman with no arms or legs who has a statue in Trafalgar Square (cant be bothered to remember her name) has said (paraphrasing) that at least she's managed to get in Trafalgar Sq without killing or maiming anybody.

How dare she. How dare she take a swipe like this at Nelson - he has earned his place, she hasn't. She was born without arms or legs, which is very sad and I do feel sorry for her (although a bigger part of me thanks god it is her and not me - as does everybody else if they are honest with themselves), but she hasn't done anything of note, she hasn't had to adapt (you don't need to adapt if you know no different) and is only famous for having no arms and no legs and having a baby.

I'm not particularly bothered that she's on the plinth (although I think an art gallery would be more appropriate), but I am bothered that she has the temerity to reduce Nelson's achievements to 'killing and maiming'.

Am I the only one who thinks she needs a reality check - and needs to be taken down a peg or two?

[woofgang]

well you can't say that she is wrong can you? The fact is that all the other people in that square were put there as a result of bloody conflict and Nelson himself was first maimed and then killed. I think that you are being a bit unfair to say that she hasn't had to adapt, maybe adapt is not the right word, but she has certainly had a harder row to hoe than most of us including me.

I have never met her, but from what you hear and read in the media, she certainly seems to be a forthright and outspoken person and certainly seems to have some issues with her young life. We should set Nelson's achievements within the context of his time, a time when children were sent up chimneys and put on warships to be powdermonkeys.

One interesting thing that the Alison Lapper statue has done is to get people talking about art and Trafalgar Square and having opinions, an amazing achievemnt IMHO

[Loosehead]

I agree ding dong. Too many pacifists choose not to understand that defence is necessary in fact it creates the safe conditions so they are allowed to hate the system that sustains them.

[bazwillrun]

the statue is nothing but P.C. as we have come to expect from the likes of ken livingstone.

[vehelpfulguy]

I recently went for a walk round central London, and I was amazed at how many statues there are to people who have led us in battles.

In fact it seems the only way you CAN get a statue to yourself is to fight a war.

Britain has had many brilliant people in its history, Shakespeare, scientists, inventors, but you rarely see statues to them.

I think the point of the new statue is to say that lets have some ordinairy people who have done things, not just people who have fought in wars.

[jake-the-peg]

In trafalgar square we have Sir Henry Havelock - he helped put down the Indian mutiny.

Sir Charles James Napier he conquored Sindh in Pakistan

there are are busts of Beatty(admiral at Jutland), Jellicoe (Boxer rebellion) and Cunningham (WWII) and George IV

Cunningham and Nelson are the only ones that fought to defend their country the others fought to wars to conquor other countries or in WWI to hold onto foreign posessions.

Personally I'd like to see a statue of Alexander Flemming there - Given that WWII was the first war where more people died in combat than from disease he saved the lives of more soldiers and sailors and civillians than probably any other Britain.  

[Ding-Dong]

vehelpfulguy - she's only on the plinth because she's not normal. If she was able bodied, there is no way she would be on that plinth - she's famous for having no arms or legs, and that is pretty much it - she hasn't actually achieved anything that warrants a statue in our greatest London square.

[woofgang]

okay so what does?...apart from war??

[Grunty]

Jake is right about who should be there.  Although we sometimes have to defend ourselves, we could stop interfering with other countries and stop glorifying war.  Even the peace-loving Princess Di had to be paid the final insult - by having her body put on a gun carriage.

[shivvy]

How on earth you can say that someone without arms or legs hasn't had to adapt because they know no different is beyond me.  Take a moment - just a very short moment and have a quick think about how you would do what you are doing right now if you had no arms or legs eg typing on a keyboard, making and drinking a cup of coffee etc and then think again about your opinion of people not having to adapt. Get real.

I also think that it is important to note that although you do feel sorry for her, without meeting this lady I would suggest that she does not want any sympathy from you or anyone else.

One final point is to inform you that this ladys name is Alison Lapper and common manners would suggest that you use her name.  It might also go some way toward allowing you to appear slightly more informed than is currently coming across in your question.

[brachiopod]

Why has this particular sculpture raised more feeling than the previous temporary exhibits on this plinth?

Why has it warranted more vitriol about whether it is art or that it's "typical of the PC brigade" than the perspex plinth that preceeded it?

Are people so threatened or disgusted that they resort to personal attacks on the subject? Why? Are they so adverse to facing their own prejudices and uncomfortable at having to think about the subject in hand?

[cliffsdoll]

just a simple view from an ordinary person,  i agree slightly that the disabled lady has;nt done anyththing for her country or anything heroic,   also i havent been involved in war or killing, yet i don't have a statue

[woofgang]

have you ever worked with people who have a disability? Their ordinary life is heroic!

[kags]

The statue is meant to be a cultural focus, nobody is claiming that it represents a heroine of national significance - I am sure Alison herself would be the first to agree that she is just a woman getting on with her life despite having many more hurdles to overcome than the average person. What it DOES represent is the fact that there ARE thousands, millions, of remarkable people getting on with their lives despite physical disability, or other hardships. Why can't we celebrate that?

There is no reason to compare the statue with Nelson, just look at it as a piece of work in its own right. And as woofgang says, it has got people talking, surely that's the whole point?

I agree also with brachiopod, nobody got uptight about the perspex statue that was there before, but it seems that a nude pregnant disabled woman is just one step too far for all the people who claim to be open minded.

[cliffsdoll]

woofgang...  no i never worked with disabled people, but i do know a few disabled people, i also came across a man with no legs and just one arm, during  a stay in hospital.   your comment about disabled people having a heroic life,   if that's the case should'nt all disabled people be put on a plinth,   i hear again and again that disabled people want to be treated the same as everone else,  yet this lady has been singled out as being different, this is not equality.    what about statues for  siemese twins,  midgets,  one legged people,    arless people, the list goes on and on 

[Ding-Dong]

Kags - we're not comparing the statue with Nelson - she is. She is the one who compared herself to Nelson by saying at least she managed to get on the plinth without killing and maiming anybody. That, to me, is utter utter arrogance, from somebody that hasn't done anything of any note to earn her place on the plinth. She is on the plinth solely due to her disability. Why?

[Grimalkin]

Re the suggestion that Lapper hadn't done anything of note: she had an established reputation as an artist prior to all the fuss. Her study and critique of representations of the body (also predating the debate inspired by the statue) contributes to a growing area of academic research which spans anthropology, sociology, cultural theory, cognitive philosophy, literature, drama, and art. 

[spinchimp]

Too many people missing the point here - this statue is not there as a tribute to the subject - its there as a piece of public art that:

is beautiful;

poses questions about our attitudes to disability;

celebarates difference and diversity.

And thats just my personal view - its not not not not a tribute to Alison Lapper - as some have already noted here, thats not what she would want, she doesn't want sympathy or tributes - she was the model for a work of art.

[spinchimp]

or even 'celebrates' .

[Ding-Dong]

So she's an established artist, whoopee doo - that still doesn't give her the clout to compare herself to Nelson. Nelson is one of our all time great heroes - she is merely an artist, who happens to be disabled.

And would this artist be on the plinth if she didn't happen to be disabled??? Absolutely not.

[luckyboy]

''needs a reality test and needs to be taken down a peg or two''..

Absolute nonsense, theres plenty of things going on in the world to get annoyed about, this is not one of them..

whether people like this statue or not, its not as if its going to be there permanantly is it.

For the record i think this lady is a remarkable person who has fought her disability with great courage and bravery every bit as brave as most war heroes..some of the comments i have read about her are repulsive and full of crap.