. . . Murray, about the statues . . .
In rebuttal to https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/aug/19/naked-donald-trump-statue-satire-ageist-body-shaming . . .
Regarding the five Trump statues, so let met get this straight, you feel 'NB' (a genteel designation based upon your own) is not good social critique through art because it gives way to "blind hatred that obscures their intent." Seems to me that any intelligent, fact-respecting citizen who has paid any attention to 'DT' (maintaining the MO), and how could they or any other citizens NOT- thanks to all the free media attention he has managed, has formed an opinion of DT that hovers somewhere in the 'don't care-for' range, and hopefully not quite as extreme as true hate. But that opinion is anything but 'blind.'
You say that the work's "slumpy, distended belly, withered buttocks and sagging pectorals, crosses callously into generalized ageism and body-shaming." I do believe that even DT himself might characterize that description as a bit too "politically correct." My aging, a-Phelpsian body would certainly make a poor cover for Playgirl (does that still exist?), but I am far from offended by, don't forget that DT HIMSELF invited visions of his 'man-parts' into our consciousness at one of the Republican primary debates, the NB sculptures.
Let's face it, this man is seriously (I think) running for the presidency of the United States of America. He is a television 'personality' by definition. He purposely taunts persons and peoples with all the forethought of a corner-bar drunk. He is a free target. He belongs to the public. I, for one, think the sculptures were quite funny and clever. Maybe the pieces are not Da Vincis, but I truly suspect the artist was never under any such delusion.
small.jpg)
