Ranting Lily: Not That Innocent Indeed!
A few nights ago, I settled in after writing the blog post to surf the web. I start where I always start, on MSN. I made a beeline for the Entertainment section. Not only am I going to admit that I enjoy celebrity dish, I will go as far as to tell you that I will live for the day when Katie Holmes wakes up out of her stupor and backhands Tom Cruise for getting her into this mess…
But I digress. Navigating the tool bar, I pulled up the entertainment section. I had glanced away as the screen loaded to catch the last few minutes of the episode of “Good Eats” I had TiVo’d. As Alton Brown bid me goodbye, I turned back to my lap top and just about lost both my lunch AND recently consumed dinner. Confronting me, plain as day, was sculptor Daniel Edward’s ode to the Pro-Life movement. I’m going to insert the link here, if you want to see it…be my guest. Just make sure you haven’t just eaten.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12055117/
For the weak-kneed, the picture is the now infamous statue of Edward’s “Monument to Pro-Life: The Birth of Sean Preston.” The Sean Preston in question is Sean Preston Federline. Little Sean P (as his nickname hating father refers to him), is better known as Britney Spear’s baby. Why is it infamous? The statue depicts Mrs. K-Fed posed on hands and knees giving birth on a bear-skin rug.
Before we go into the innumerable levels on how this statue is just so…wrong, let’s examine why Daniel Edwards chose to create this “tribute” to the Pro-Life movement. According to the website www.defamer.com, Edward’s people wrote a press release to explain the intentions of his artwork:
"Monument to Pro-Life: The Birth of Sean Preston," believed Pro-Life's first monument to the 'act of giving birth,' is purportedly an idealized depiction of Britney in delivery. Natural aspects of Spears' pregnancy, like lactiferous breasts and protruding naval, compliment a posterior view that depicts widened hips for birthing and reveals the crowning of baby Sean's head.”
Mmm. Crowning. Yeah, you don’t see THAT everyday. In case the exhibitors didn’t think the clay model wasn’t relevant enough, they allowed it to be displayed next to a rack of anti-abortion material.
Okay…it’s not that I’m gung-ho to protect Pro-Life or Pro-Choice views. It’s not the fact that it’s Britney Spears. What gets me is the fact that it looks more like a nudie shoot for Hustler than a TRIBUTE to the preciousness that is human life! I don’t know where he got the idea that a bear-skin rug was a part of the whole birthing process…but someone needs to really explain the facts of life to Mr. Edwards. Ask any woman who has been through the event. You’re more than likely to ACT like a bear.
Who really needed to see this? It’s a naked, pregnant Britney (Who, by the way, Edward’s says he’s never met or consulted with) with her arse stuck up in the air. To me, this has as much to do with Pro-Life as the dolphins have to do with the desert. Was there an outcry for this kind of thing? I want to know WHO was demanding to see a former Pop Princess in a less then flattering dirty downward dog pose!
These people then need to be rounded up and beaten over the head with blunt objects. Hit them very hard.
As Edward’s explains it in an Associated Press phone interview, “I admire her. This is an idealized figure. Everyone is coming at me with anger and venom, but I depicted her as she has depicted herself -- seductively.”
Seductively. Okay, Daniel Edwards. THERE IS NOTHING SEDUCTIVE about pushing a child out of your body. I don’t know much about birthing no babies…but I know enough that there is a lot of screaming (and sometimes cussing) involved. It’s called the “Miracle of Birth” for a reason!
Probably the thing that irritates me the most about the statue is the fact that there will be some people out there who are actually rallying around this thing as a Pro-Life icon. And why does this bother me? At the end of the MSN article explaining this whole debacle, Edward’s was asked whether or not he was anti-abortion:
“You nailed me. I’m not saying that I am. I wouldn’t march with either pro-life or pro-choice advocates. This is not meant to be political.”
Thanks a lot Edwards. Not only did you sear a vision I never really wanted into my brain…but you’re also an opportunist with no soul.
I hope you’re happy.
posted by Lillian T. White @ 6:08 PM
5 Comments:
Yeah I am totally with you on this one. Was this statue really necessary? Ummmm I am going to have to say "BIG FAT NOOOOOOOOooooo!!!!"
During any given typical work day I come across discussions about "What is art?". Occupational hazard, I suppose. This often leads to comparisons, or an attempt to define in some way what differentiates art from entertainment. Eventually people get around to the old standard that art should challenge you and entertainment should, well, entertain you.
I'm not personally keen on the subject matter at hand, but I find it interesting that an argument could be made that this particular piece of "art" met its aim. It challenged you so much you got downright outraged and it inspired you to form an opinion so strongly that you wrote this entry.
Of course that doesn't make Edwards any less an opportunist (I'll leave his soul or lack there of to those better suited to that sort of argument). Being an opportunist though, is not antithetical to being an artist. From Michaelangelo to Mozart, they've known how to work the system well enough to earn their rent from their sponsors.
Many artists, performing and visual, were considered amoral, unprincipled and completely lacking of souls in their day. Your beloved Shakespeare even had his detractors. People questioned the validity of what they produced and often deemed the results worthless exercises in self-indulgence that nobody needed to see or hear. We now consider what so shocked and outraged their contemporaries to be works of art that define us as a society and serve as markers along the evolution of civilization. Thermometers of the aesthetic of their day.
Of course, there's also been a lot of crap produced along the way that we've rightly forgotten about until some archeologist digs it up and carbon dates it. A little distressing to think that this piece might be what people 400 years from now thinks represents the mindset in the year 2006. Somehow I don't think it'll have that kind of staying power. Although someone probably said that about Warhol.
The cool thing, regardless of some crazy statue (and really, let's just be grateful Paris Hilton hasn't gone and got herself pregnant yet or you can imagine what the subject matter would have ended up looking like then - let's all take a moment to shudder, shall we?) is that in true MGF fashion you observed something in your world and dang nab it you had something to say about it so you did. You go girl!
I know I've been AWOL a lot lately but I'm glad I found a time to come snoop around here. It was so classically you! So MGF. It's nice to know there are constants in the world. Miss you!
is it just me or does that not look like britney spears? I've looked and looked and I swear it doesnt' look like her. Then i look harder and I don't see her giving birth....what i see is her on all fours with her back arched like she is about to let Kevin hit it from the back....so do i find it disgusting nope not really....do i find it weird...absolutely....is it art?....do i really care.....mmmmm not really...but if he calls it art then by darn its art...trust me i've seen worse....
oh and by the way....maybe the allergy medicine is messing with my head...but how exactly does this connect to the abortion debate? Plenty of women give birth who also are pro-choice....many women never have children who are pro-life advocates....im so thoroughly confused by how it all connects to britney spears having sex doggystyle....so i'll stop trying to make sense of it....
Libby -- we're so glad you could make it! Thank you for your wonderful comments! We've now made a verb out of MGF...that is so flippin' sweeeeeeeeet!
You know, it is really sad to think that 400 years from now, somone might dig up the statue or a picture of it and think THAT is representative of our society's mindset. The sad thing is, I know part of that is true!
But you're right...even the greats have their detractors. There's always going to be those who hate it and those who love it. Heck, I'm pretty sure if people knew who I really was...I'd have a target on my back!
But hey, it started discussion. So now MY point has been achieved *smiles* Thanks everyone for the comments!
Post a Comment
<< Home