Phallic art has Texas neighbourhood stiff with rage

Or at least, mildly embarrassed to get caught staring at their neighbour’s dong.

A family moved into an Abeline neighbourhood and placed their replica statue of David in the front yard. People uncomfortable with sexuality in art (and everywhere else probably) contacted the media.

No one has asked them to remove it — yet — though some families believe the statue is offensive and needs to go.

“It’s there. It’s right there,” neighbor Alina Hatcher said of the statue’s “assets.” “You don’t have to look for it. You don’t have to stare hard. It’s right there.”

And how many times has Ms Hatcher been out in her yard staring and comparing, hmm? Is David better equipped than the men in her life? Or has she just not seen one in a while?

The homeowners didn’t want to go on camera, but said they’re not trying to offend anyone and that the statue is just art.

Neighbors say they understand art, but ask does it have to be this anatomically correct?

For sculptures who care about realism, yes. Michelangelo cared. He wanted an accurate depiction of David, he who slayed Goliath. A check of Wikipedia provides some history:

Originally commissioned as one of a series of statues of prophets to be positioned along the roofline of the east end of Florence Cathedral, the statue was instead placed in a public square, outside the Palazzo della Signoria, the seat of civic government in Florence, where it was unveiled on 8 September 1504. Because of the nature of the hero that it represented, it soon came to symbolise the defence of civil liberties embodied in the Florentine Republic, an independent city-state threatened on all sides by more powerful rival states and by the hegemony of the Medici family. The eyes of David, with a warning glare, were turned towards Rome.

Perhaps this couple ought to line David up so he’s facing Washington, D.C.? Or maybe they’d rather he mooned the government instead. Who knows what their political leanings might be. Back to the article.

“Some art needs to be left in the doggone museum,” neighbor Jacqueline Hince said.

A place Ms. Hince will never set foot in, thus will never be at risk of seeing something that offends her? I expect the replica standing in Florence square is proudly naked and admired by all manner of tourist wanting a photo opportunity. So what’s up with these prudes?

Local police say it’s not illegal to display nude art. However, they’re encouraging the owners to cover the statue to “keep the peace” in the neighborhood.

Which reminds me (via same wiki):

The plaster cast of David at the Victoria and Albert Museum has a detachable plaster fig leaf which is displayed nearby. It was created in response to Queen Victoria’s shock upon first viewing the statue’s nudity, and was hung on the figure prior to royal visits, using two strategically placed hooks.

Anyone who wants to claim that morality comes from God is either forgetting or deliberately ignorant of the fact that that morality (and therefore attitudes toward sex and sexuality) is not a static, unchangeable thing. It varies from place to place, from culture to culture, from history to history. Hopefully the couple won’t feel forced give their neighbours the same royal treatment.

About 1minionsopinion

Canadian Atheist Basically ordinary Library employee Avid book lover Ditto for movies Wanna-be writer Procrastinator
This entry was posted in In the Media, religiosity and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.