Senegal's pride and joy, or a towering waste of money? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/24/senegal-african-renaissance-monument-dakar)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.timeslive.co.za%2Fmultimedia%2Fdynamic%2F00119%2FSENEGAL_MONUMENT_CO_119284b.jpg&hash=45d2ea65f35719014315ede7de9a3679c216c278)
QuoteIts advocates describe it as Africa's long-overdue answer to the Eiffel tower or Statue of Liberty. Its detractors call it an ugly £17m monument to hubris in a country that can ill afford grandiose gestures.
The 49 metre bronze statue, on a hilltop overlooking the Atlantic in Dakar, Senegal, has provoked debate about the role of public art and whether it represents an inspiration or an insult to the poor suffering in its shadow.
The towering structure, depicting a family rising triumphantly from a volcano, is intended to symbolise Africa's renaissance and prove that the continent can build its own monuments to rival those bequeathed by European colonialists.
Critics regard it rather differently, as Africa's latest lavish expression of presidential ego at the expense of the people.
On a rubbish-strewn path below, impoverished residents endure incessant power blackouts and flooding. For some, the situation is so desperate that they risk their lives crossing the sea on flimsy wooden boats bound for Europe.
The statue shows a muscular man in a heroic posture, outstretched arms wrapped around his wife and child. Nearly 50 North Korean workers were brought in to build it, because of their expertise with bronze art, and some Senegalese have complained of its communist-era design. It has also drawn criticism from Muslims, who make up 94% of Senegal's population, because of Islamic prohibitions on representations of the human form.
Abdoulaye Wade, Senegal's octogenarian president, has compared the work to some of the west's best-known landmarks, and some Senegalese do regard it as a symbol of pride that has economic spin-offs.
Alassane Cisse, a Senegalese delegate at the world summit on arts and culture in Johannesburg, South Africa, said: "All cities need signatures, but in Dakar we have had only monuments which existed during colonisation. Africa needs its own great monuments like the Eiffel tower and the Statue of Liberty. This symbol of African renaissance will motivate people to rehabilitate and work with Africa."
He added that the site has exhibition, multimedia and conference rooms, as well as a top-floor viewing platform giving a bird's eye view of Dakar. "It will be a cultural place. Around the monument there will be a theatre and shops. Many tourists will visit there, so the economic effects will benefit the population."
But the president has sparked anger by maintaining that he is entitled to 35% of any tourist revenues it generates, because he owns the "intellectual rights".
Critics say the £17m could have been used for more pressing concerns. Djiby Diakhate, a sociologist at Dakar's Cheikh Anta Diop university, told the Associated Press: "Senegal is going through a profound crisis. Our economy is dying. People are struggling to eat. We should be spending money helping people survive."
Others are ambivalent. George Ajjan, an American political analyst in Dakar, said: "I pass that statue at least once a day, and more often than not, the taxi driver accompanying me makes a snide remark about what a waste of money it is in a country where many people struggle to eat.
"But for tourist purposes, the statue is well-placed, because travellers journeying from the current airport and chic area near the beach to downtown Dakar pass right below it on well-paved, well-maintained roads that hug the coastline. So despite being a boondoggle, it could make a heck of a first impression for a visitor upon arriving in Senegal."
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.guim.co.uk%2Fsys-images%2FGuardian%2FAbout%2FGeneral%2F2009%2F9%2F24%2F1253811019230%2FMonument-of-the-African-R-001.jpg&hash=4c45039f122cdb283d66d3a74ffe24b2a77c6c18)
Women walk past rubbish heaps and unfinished homes in a neighborhood at the base of the nearly-completed 50-meter-high (328-foot-high) bronze statue dubbed the Monument of the African Renaissance in Dakar, Senegal.
49 meters is like half of 328 feet. Buy a calculator.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 22, 2009, 04:29:37 AM
49 meters is like half of 328 feet. Buy a calculator.
The article didn't specify which size feet they used for comparison.
Doesn't seem like a wise choice for me. They don't have that many water tiles.
Quote from: Sahib on November 22, 2009, 05:41:41 AM
Doesn't seem like a wise choice for me. They don't have that many water tiles.
Au contraire. Dakar seems like an ideal choice.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmappery.com%2Fmaps%2FDakar-Topo-Map.mediumthumb.jpg&hash=48dc20398befb216e5ea281ff5ce8c1dda356dad)
That photo of the statue and trash pile is wonderful :lol:
Also amusing they had to bring in North Koreans to build it.
It is a nice looking statue though
It does have a very "Sovietesque" look to it.
Not that that's a bad thing - if there's one thing the Soviets did well, it was large, intimidating monuments and buildings.
Why isn't it a statue of Obama? Or is it? We shall see which head they put on the guy.
Quote from: The Brain on November 22, 2009, 07:59:31 AM
Why isn't it a statue of Obama? Or is it? We shall see which head they put on the guy.
The jaw of the female isn't manly enough to be his wife.
Quote from: Strix on November 22, 2009, 09:52:37 AM
Quote from: The Brain on November 22, 2009, 07:59:31 AM
Why isn't it a statue of Obama? Or is it? We shall see which head they put on the guy.
The jaw of the female isn't manly enough to be his wife.
Proud black men don't haf to stay wif they baby mama anyhow. Your objection is irrelevant.
Quote from: Slargos on November 22, 2009, 12:49:14 PM
Quote from: Strix on November 22, 2009, 09:52:37 AM
Quote from: The Brain on November 22, 2009, 07:59:31 AM
Why isn't it a statue of Obama? Or is it? We shall see which head they put on the guy.
The jaw of the female isn't manly enough to be his wife.
Proud black men don't haf to stay wif they baby mama anyhow. Your objection is irrelevant.
Yay I thought Strix wrote that. Congrats. :mellow:
First I've seen of this. My reaction is to Africa:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg687.imageshack.us%2Fimg687%2F1471%2Fposter69752697.jpg&hash=7d3460747644441b1aa025ab5fb2cd25e9ab4438)
Sure its just Sengal but still...This is just typical of much of Afrca.They've got problems on a whole different scale to other countries yet they persist in stupid big projects like this as if they were real, developed countries.
Quote from: Strix on November 22, 2009, 09:52:37 AM
Quote from: The Brain on November 22, 2009, 07:59:31 AM
Why isn't it a statue of Obama? Or is it? We shall see which head they put on the guy.
The jaw of the female isn't manly enough to be his wife.
Ass ain't big enough, either :)
Does the typical Senegalese woman have Barbie hair?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 22, 2009, 04:34:10 PM
Does the typical Senegalese woman have Barbie hair?
So that's what that is. I thought it was:
(https://www.bmhba.com/bf/messaging/FTD%20Logo.gif)
Quote from: derspiess on November 22, 2009, 04:41:42 PM
So that's what that is. I thought it was:
(https://www.bmhba.com/bf/messaging/FTD%20Logo.gif)
I think you're right. We had this a while back and turned out she's wearing some headdress deal.
Artistic value of the statue aside, I am not sure i buy the "the money could have been better spent helping people" argument, because if we followed it to its logical conclusion, no work of art, statue or a non-utilitarian building would ever be completed.
The Statue of Liberty, the Eiffel Tower, Mount Rushmore (not to mention stuff like the Pyramids) - all were useless from a purely utilitarian perspective, after all.
Quote from: Martinus on November 22, 2009, 05:22:58 PM
Artistic value of the statue aside, I am not sure i buy the "the money could have been better spent helping people" argument, because if we followed it to its logical conclusion, no work of art, statue or a non-utilitarian building would ever be completed.
The Statue of Liberty, the Eiffel Tower, Mount Rushmore (not to mention stuff like the Pyramids) - all were useless from a purely utilitarian perspective, after all.
The west has money to waste though. Africa doesn't.
You're a rich European lawyer type, you can afford to think of buying a new mac just because your old one is scratched. Even the poorest people in western countries generally don't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from (yeah there are some like this but they're a tiny amount). In Senegal however....their poor on a whole different level of poor.
Its hierarchy of needs. Once you've established survival then you can concentrate on culture and other goodness, they enrich your life and make it even better. The Senegalese government though is ignoring this simple logic and being absolutely silly.
Anyway, since Senegal apparently has enough cash to blow on monuments, I think the U.S. can confidently cancel our "economic assistance" to them. Or at least cut it by the value of the monument, which adds up to about half the value of our 2008 aid.
Quote from: Tyr on November 22, 2009, 06:10:18 PM
The west has money to waste though. Africa doesn't.
You're a rich European lawyer type, you can afford to think of buying a new mac just because your old one is scratched. Even the poorest people in western countries generally don't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from (yeah there are some like this but they're a tiny amount). In Senegal however....their poor on a whole different level of poor.
Its hierarchy of needs. Once you've established survival then you can concentrate on culture and other goodness, they enrich your life and make it even better. The Senegalese government though is ignoring this simple logic and being absolutely silly.
aka No Senegal you can't have anything nice or notable. You are a shitty country and you need to remain that way.
If you say that we can't have monuments because the money would be better spent on the poor, then nothing would ever be built.
On the other hand, that particular monument is a gaudy eyesore.
I personally think it's hideous.
However I think it sort of makes sense. Senegal is something of an African success story. It's one of the only countries in Africa that's only had peaceful transitions of power and they were to begin with and in the past 20 years it's always happened democratically (Senghor, the first leader of a free Senegal, went through an authoritarian phase but then introduced a more democratic constitution and resigned), though there are problems with their elections that's still no mean achievement. They were also lucky that their first leader was a poetry writing intellectual, who was an Immortal of the Academie Francaise, because he tended to emphasise education and compared with much of Africa Senegal's doing okay on that front and the economy seems to be doing well and inflation's under control.
So I don't know, I've less problem with this than if, say, Mugabe decided to build a giant monument or Kabila thought the time was right to redevelop Kinshasa
Oh and I agree that it is hideous. Should have hired a better architect.
I have no problem with Dakar being the Stalingrad of Africa. Spend money on monuments, even hideous ones.
Quote from: PDH on November 22, 2009, 09:55:15 PM
I have no problem with Dakar being the Stalingrad of Africa. Spend money on monuments, even hideous ones.
It does sorta look like the Stalingrad monument doesn't it? At least it has big tits.
I think it's a good looking piece of bronze, but then I like that kind of statuary. It's obviously a waste of taxpayer funds; this sort of nonsense is better left to the crazy rich in the private sector.
I thought they were building a massive super-computer to control their nukes like the Forbin Project.
This is disappointing.
Quote from: Martinus on November 22, 2009, 05:22:58 PM
Artistic value of the statue aside, I am not sure i buy the "the money could have been better spent helping people" argument, because if we followed it to its logical conclusion, no work of art, statue or a non-utilitarian building would ever be completed.
The Statue of Liberty, the Eiffel Tower, Mount Rushmore (not to mention stuff like the Pyramids) - all were useless from a purely utilitarian perspective, after all.
They are not useless - they are profitable investments that made money by attracting tourists :contract:
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on November 22, 2009, 07:04:45 AM
It does have a very "Sovietesque" look to it.
Not that that's a bad thing - if there's one thing the Soviets did well, it was large, intimidating monuments and buildings.
The statue is done and I think it looks like it has much more of a fascist influence than a Soviet one. It has a distinct superheroic "Aryan" flair to it. Just need to change the facial features and it would like fine in Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usnewsdot.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F01%2FSenegal-Statue.jpg&hash=740ee8e06890be31d1eb3a9681b3f9ebbaf69feb)
Who cares? It's not like many excellent European monuments weren't built while most of the citizenry lived in abject poverty.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 04, 2010, 08:57:08 PM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on November 22, 2009, 07:04:45 AM
It does have a very "Sovietesque" look to it.
Not that that's a bad thing - if there's one thing the Soviets did well, it was large, intimidating monuments and buildings.
The statue is done and I think it looks like it has much more of a fascist influence than a Soviet one. It has a distinct superheroic "Arayn" flair to it. Just need to change the facial features and it would like fine in Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usnewsdot.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F01%2FSenegal-Statue.jpg&hash=740ee8e06890be31d1eb3a9681b3f9ebbaf69feb)
I agree. The Arayn influences here are remarkable.
I'd say the impression it gives of the man having his feet stuck in the rock of Africa is a perfect symbol to represent how modern Africa is still trapped by its' history, both recent and colonial.
And you're semi-naked but you still remember your hat? :lmfao: I thought Senegal was a French colony, not a British one. :hmm:
Quote from: Neil on April 04, 2010, 09:08:47 PM
Who cares? It's not like many excellent European monuments weren't built while most of the citizenry lived in abject poverty.
I'd even go further: virtually no really impressive building, place or monument has been constructed by democratic rich European countries. All the really impressive architectural feats were by monarchies or dictatorships. Stuff like Baron Haussman's redesign of Paris would not work in modern times.
I'll go even further than that:
The US didnt even pay for the fucking statue of liberty and all our other monuments are butt ugly. The Washington monument looks like an erection and all our other monuments are either war memories or lifelike statues (which we can all agree are the least sincere form of art)
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 01:11:58 AM
Quote from: Neil on April 04, 2010, 09:08:47 PM
Who cares? It's not like many excellent European monuments weren't built while most of the citizenry lived in abject poverty.
I'd even go further: virtually no really impressive building, place or monument has been constructed by democratic rich European countries. All the really impressive architectural feats were by monarchies or dictatorships. Stuff like Baron Haussman's redesign of Paris would not work in modern times.
France was a republic when the Statue of Liberty was built wasn't it?
What about all of America's monuments?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 04, 2010, 08:57:08 PM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on November 22, 2009, 07:04:45 AM
It does have a very "Sovietesque" look to it.
Not that that's a bad thing - if there's one thing the Soviets did well, it was large, intimidating monuments and buildings.
The statue is done and I think it looks like it has much more of a fascist influence than a Soviet one.
Possibly, but since the two styles are identical how would anyone ever know?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 05, 2010, 01:17:34 AMFrance was a republic when the Statue of Liberty was built wasn't it?
The Statue of Liberty in Paris is not particularly impressive. It's just 10 meters or so high. The Eiffel Tower would be an exception though as it was built by the Third French Republic.
QuoteWhat about all of America's monuments?
Did you miss the word "European" in Neil's and my posts? :huh:
The effect is most striking when you just consider the postwar period. Europe had unparalleled wealth like never before in its history and yet it did not create any really impressive monuments/plazas or even buildings as far as I can tell.
Some infrastructure projects (channel tunnel, San Bernhard tunnel, belt bridge, Millaut Viaduct etc.) are grandiose, but they probably all have a business case and thus don't really qualify for this debate.
Perhaps looking upon this mighty statue will inspire the people of Senegal to be less poor. :)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 04, 2010, 08:57:08 PM
The statue is done and I think it looks like it has much more of a fascist influence than a Soviet one. It has a distinct superheroic "Aryan" flair to it. Just need to change the facial features and it would like fine in Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy.
Well, it was built by North Korea....
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 03:13:27 AM
The effect is most striking when you just consider the postwar period. Europe had unparalleled wealth like never before in its history and yet it did not create any really impressive monuments/plazas or even buildings as far as I can tell.
Some infrastructure projects (channel tunnel, San Bernhard tunnel, belt bridge, Millaut Viaduct etc.) are grandiose, but they probably all have a business case and thus don't really qualify for this debate.
That hideous Louvre pyramid rather confirms your argument, but also makes us glad it is true.
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 03:13:27 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 05, 2010, 01:17:34 AMFrance was a republic when the Statue of Liberty was built wasn't it?
The Statue of Liberty in Paris is not particularly impressive. It's just 10 meters or so high. The Eiffel Tower would be an exception though as it was built by the Third French Republic.
QuoteWhat about all of America's monuments?
Did you miss the word "European" in Neil's and my posts? :huh:
Yes.
Also, the Statue of Liberty isn't only 10m tall.
"The statue is 151 ft (46 m) tall, but with the pedestal and foundation, it is 305 ft (93 m) tall."
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 05, 2010, 06:42:56 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 03:13:27 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 05, 2010, 01:17:34 AMFrance was a republic when the Statue of Liberty was built wasn't it?
The Statue of Liberty in Paris is not particularly impressive. It's just 10 meters or so high. The Eiffel Tower would be an exception though as it was built by the Third French Republic.
QuoteWhat about all of America's monuments?
Did you miss the word "European" in Neil's and my posts? :huh:
Yes.
Also, the Statue of Liberty isn't only 10m tall.
"The statue is 151 ft (46 m) tall, but with the pedestal and foundation, it is 305 ft (93 m) tall."
:lol:
:hmm:
:huh:
I assume you are continuing this as a jest, Tim? After all, I'd hate to think your reading skills are that bad... ;)
TImmy. :weep:
The most hilarious thing to come from it is Waye's idea of claiming 35% of all tourism revenue generated by the statue as "author's rights". :lol:
btw there's 2 Statue of Liberty in Paris.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 05, 2010, 01:17:34 AM
What about all of America's monuments?
Does America actually have any nice monuments?
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 01:11:58 AM
I'd even go further: virtually no really impressive building, place or monument has been constructed by democratic rich European countries. All the really impressive architectural feats were by monarchies or dictatorships. Stuff like Baron Haussman's redesign of Paris would not work in modern times.
I guess that Barcelona's "Sagrada Familia" is the exception to the rule, then. ;)
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 06:57:37 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 01:11:58 AM
I'd even go further: virtually no really impressive building, place or monument has been constructed by democratic rich European countries. All the really impressive architectural feats were by monarchies or dictatorships. Stuff like Baron Haussman's redesign of Paris would not work in modern times.
I guess that Barcelona's "Sagrada Familia" is the exception to the rule, then. ;)
Call us back when they finish the thing. Problem is that most of us are long dead by then. And even so I think the best description of the damn thing I saw would be tacky and tasteless. I prefer the cathedral tbh.
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 06:57:37 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 01:11:58 AM
I'd even go further: virtually no really impressive building, place or monument has been constructed by democratic rich European countries. All the really impressive architectural feats were by monarchies or dictatorships. Stuff like Baron Haussman's redesign of Paris would not work in modern times.
I guess that Barcelona's "Sagrada Familia" is the exception to the rule, then. ;)
Not at all.
Quote from: Agelastus on April 05, 2010, 06:48:56 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 05, 2010, 06:42:56 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 03:13:27 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 05, 2010, 01:17:34 AMFrance was a republic when the Statue of Liberty was built wasn't it?
The Statue of Liberty in Paris is not particularly impressive. It's just 10 meters or so high. The Eiffel Tower would be an exception though as it was built by the Third French Republic.
QuoteWhat about all of America's monuments?
Did you miss the word "European" in Neil's and my posts? :huh:
Yes.
Also, the Statue of Liberty isn't only 10m tall.
"The statue is 151 ft (46 m) tall, but with the pedestal and foundation, it is 305 ft (93 m) tall."
:lol:
:hmm:
:huh:
I assume you are continuing this as a jest, Tim? After all, I'd hate to think your reading skills are that bad... ;)
:weep:
People see what they expect to see.
I had no idea there was a statue of Liberty in Paris and assumed he was talking about the same statue I was.
Quote from: Syt on November 22, 2009, 03:55:11 AM
...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.guim.co.uk%2Fsys-images%2FGuardian%2FAbout%2FGeneral%2F2009%2F9%2F24%2F1253811019230%2FMonument-of-the-African-R-001.jpg&hash=4c45039f122cdb283d66d3a74ffe24b2a77c6c18)
Women walk past rubbish heaps and unfinished homes in a neighborhood at the base of the nearly-completed 50-meter-high (328-foot-high) bronze statue dubbed the Monument of the African Renaissance in Dakar, Senegal.
Nothing like like erecting monuments to the inflated egos of african leaders while their people are living in and eating shit. :rolleyes:
Silly 3rd worlders.
G.
Quote from: Neil on April 05, 2010, 07:05:35 AM
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 06:57:37 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 01:11:58 AM
I'd even go further: virtually no really impressive building, place or monument has been constructed by democratic rich European countries. All the really impressive architectural feats were by monarchies or dictatorships. Stuff like Baron Haussman's redesign of Paris would not work in modern times.
I guess that Barcelona's "Sagrada Familia" is the exception to the rule, then. ;)
Not at all.
The Big Ben and the Monument to Vittorio Emmanuele II were the other two that came to my mind... :hmm:
Quote from: Cecil on April 05, 2010, 07:03:11 AM
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 06:57:37 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 01:11:58 AM
I'd even go further: virtually no really impressive building, place or monument has been constructed by democratic rich European countries. All the really impressive architectural feats were by monarchies or dictatorships. Stuff like Baron Haussman's redesign of Paris would not work in modern times.
I guess that Barcelona's "Sagrada Familia" is the exception to the rule, then. ;)
Call us back when they finish the thing. Problem is that most of us are long dead by then. And even so I think the best description of the damn thing I saw would be tacky and tasteless. I prefer the cathedral tbh.
It is scheduled for 2026, so I guess that all of us will get to see it finished. ;)
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 07:21:23 AM
Quote from: Cecil on April 05, 2010, 07:03:11 AM
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 06:57:37 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 05, 2010, 01:11:58 AM
I'd even go further: virtually no really impressive building, place or monument has been constructed by democratic rich European countries. All the really impressive architectural feats were by monarchies or dictatorships. Stuff like Baron Haussman's redesign of Paris would not work in modern times.
I guess that Barcelona's "Sagrada Familia" is the exception to the rule, then. ;)
Call us back when they finish the thing. Problem is that most of us are long dead by then. And even so I think the best description of the damn thing I saw would be tacky and tasteless. I prefer the cathedral tbh.
It is scheduled for 2026, so I guess that all of us will get to see it finished. ;)
:lmfao:
Quote from: Grallon on April 05, 2010, 07:18:03 AM
Nothing like like erecting monuments to the inflated egos of african leaders while their people are living in and eating shit. :rolleyes:
Silly 3rd worlders.
Sort of like the Montreal Olympics?
Quote from: Neil on April 05, 2010, 06:55:57 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 05, 2010, 01:17:34 AM
What about all of America's monuments?
Does America actually have any nice monuments?
In Nebraska there is a cow made entirely from barbed wire. It might be a buffalo.
Carhenge. :cool:
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 07:19:02 AM
The Big Ben and the Monument to Vittorio Emmanuele II were the other two that came to my mind... :hmm:
The industrial revolution was glorious, wasn't it? Mind you, neither of those countries were really democracies.
Quote from: Grallon on April 05, 2010, 07:18:03 AM
Nothing like like erecting monuments to the inflated egos of african leaders while their people are living in and eating shit. :rolleyes:
Silly 3rd worlders.
Why are they silly? That's what civilized people do.
Quote from: Neil on April 05, 2010, 07:46:41 AM
Quote from: Grallon on April 05, 2010, 07:18:03 AM
Nothing like like erecting monuments to the inflated egos of african leaders while their people are living in and eating shit. :rolleyes:
Silly 3rd worlders.
Why are they silly? That's what civilized people do.
Well how would Grallon know?
Quote from: Grallon
Nothing like like erecting monuments to the inflated egos of african leaders while their people are living in and eating shit. :rolleyes:
Silly 3rd worlders.
I'm with Neil. Versailles was built while the people of Paris were reduced to eating rats.
Basically all of the pre-XXth century great monuments anywhere were built at great suffering from the people. If leaders had no inflated egos, we would not have anything left of note from the past.
I do like the statue, but does it mean that Senegal has only recently discovered Metal Casting? :huh:
Quote from: Martim Silva on April 05, 2010, 07:54:29 AM
Quote from: Grallon
Nothing like like erecting monuments to the inflated egos of african leaders while their people are living in and eating shit. :rolleyes:
Silly 3rd worlders.
I'm with Neil. Versailles was built while the people of Paris were reduced to eating rats.
Basically all of the pre-XXth century great monuments anywhere were built at great suffering from the people. If leaders had no inflated egos, we would not have anything left of note from the past.
I do like the statue, but does it mean that Senegal has only recently discovered Metal Casting? :huh:
Bah oldstyle colossus is bronze working. ;)
Quote from: Cecil on April 05, 2010, 08:13:43 AM
Quote from: Martim Silva on April 05, 2010, 07:54:29 AM
Quote from: Grallon
Nothing like like erecting monuments to the inflated egos of african leaders while their people are living in and eating shit. :rolleyes:
Silly 3rd worlders.
I'm with Neil. Versailles was built while the people of Paris were reduced to eating rats.
Basically all of the pre-XXth century great monuments anywhere were built at great suffering from the people. If leaders had no inflated egos, we would not have anything left of note from the past.
I do like the statue, but does it mean that Senegal has only recently discovered Metal Casting? :huh:
Bah oldstyle colossus is bronze working. ;)
Will Mali be overrun by phalanxes?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 05, 2010, 07:30:28 AM
Quote from: Grallon on April 05, 2010, 07:18:03 AM
Nothing like like erecting monuments to the inflated egos of african leaders while their people are living in and eating shit. :rolleyes:
Silly 3rd worlders.
Sort of like the Montreal Olympics?
Poutine isn't shit.
Admittedly, it may *look* like shit ... ;)
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 07:19:02 AM
The Big Ben .... came to my mind... :hmm:
The bell? It isn't even visible.
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2010, 07:19:02 AM
The Big Ben and the Monument to Vittorio Emmanuele II were the other two that came to my mind... :hmm:
To be fair the Palace of Westminster was built because the first one burned down. Admittedly they didn't have to hire Pugin....
Initially they planned to move it into Buckingham Palace but that was rejected as too Royalist, similarly a neo-Classical design was rejected as too Republican.
Thinking of modern 'monuments' there aren't very many that spring to mind. A few war memorials (the women of war in London - which I think is superb - and the Vietnam memorial spring to mind) aside from that the most impressive and remarkable public monumentry seems to be in Berlin. The redeveloped Reichstag, complete with dome, the Jewish memorial, the new Chancellery and so on.
It's not as if the money was ever going to be spent on the poor of Senegal. They got the statue and the president's Swiss bank account is slightly poorer than it would have been.
As for monuments in the UK, the secular ones are underwhelming; what I find most impressive are the dozens of cathedrals and thousands of churches that were built when the country had only a few million inhabitants.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 05, 2010, 02:42:09 PM
As for monuments in the UK, the secular ones are underwhelming; what I find most impressive are the dozens of cathedrals and thousands of churches that were built when the country had only a few million inhabitants.
I'd agree, the Churches and Cathedrals are England's museums really. They're the repository of a lot of our history. You see the architectural styles and shapes, the local posing of local potentates and the quiet seriousness of generations of wardens with plaques on the walls. You're also confronted with the tragedy of our wars, when you stand in a church surrounded by the dead and only tens of houses in the village and there, on a wooden board, is the list of tens and twenties of local Great War dead. You see their ages and their ranks and you imagine the family connections (often from them to someone on a marble plaque). They're remarkable buildings with their real and historical communities.
I often go into churches just to see what's there and very often in countryside and city they're impressive and charming. What I love is how you go into one and find some unexpected turn or feature that ties this small building and the small community buried around it to the more general historical narrative you have. It's like the general flow of time rushing over this tiny pebble in some little village far away in Shires.
The Cathedrals too are in a class of their own, though for rather different reasons.
Scottish Churches are far less interesting/more depressing.
Its the way in most European cities really...When I'm travelling my photos always seem to be mainly of churches
Quote from: Tyr on April 05, 2010, 03:33:38 PM
Its the way in most European cities really...When I'm travelling my photos always seem to be mainly of churches
It's true. Each nation's churches have their own character though. I always remember how disappointed I was when I stepped into one in Rome that looked superb from the outside only to discover it was owned by Romanian Seventh Day Adventists who'd white-washed everything and probably burned the statuary <_<
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 05, 2010, 03:38:51 PM
Quote from: Tyr on April 05, 2010, 03:33:38 PM
Its the way in most European cities really...When I'm travelling my photos always seem to be mainly of churches
It's true. Each nation's churches have their own character though. I always remember how disappointed I was when I stepped into one in Rome that looked superb from the outside only to discover it was owned by Romanian Seventh Day Adventists who'd white-washed everything and probably burned the statuary <_<
:lol:
You'd love some of the baptist churches. A couple of box fans, peeling paint on the walls, a restroom that hasn't been cleaned since Jesus walked into the temple. Wood paneling on the basement walls.
There's nothing wrong with wood paneling!
Quote from: Razgovory on April 05, 2010, 05:06:01 PM
There's nothing wrong with wood paneling!
Nope, there isn't.