9/11 memorial statue covered after complaints

[Tommy Boomfiger]

Thursday, September 19, 2002 Posted: 4:18 AM EDT (0818 GMT)

NEW YORK (AP) -- A statue of a falling woman -- designed as a memorial to those who jumped or fell to their death from the World Trade Center -- was abruptly draped in cloth and curtained off Wednesday because of complaints that it was too disturbing.

"We apologize if anyone was upset or offended by the display of this sculpture. It was certainly not our intent. The piece will be removed this evening," said Suzanne Halpin, spokeswoman for Rockefeller Center.

Eric Fischl's bronze, "Tumbling Woman," depicts a naked woman with arms and legs flailing. It went on view about a week ago in the lower concourse at Rockfeller Center and was supposed to remain on display through Monday.

Numerous news photos captured images of desperate people leaping to their deaths as the 110-story towers burned.

Some passers-by in Rockefeller Center complained that the sculpture was too graphic.

"I don't think it dignifies their deaths," said Paul Labb. "It's not art. It is very disrupting when you see it."

Some onlookers said there is a need for art that captures the horror of September 11.

"I don't think that it's done in bad taste," Christine Defonces said before the statue was covered. "It's an artist's reaction to what happened."

"The sculpture was not meant to hurt anybody," Fischl said in a statement. "It was a sincere expression of deepest sympathy for the vulnerability of the human condition. Both specifically toward the victims of September 11 and toward humanity in general."

CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/Northeast/09/18/sept11.statue.ap/index.html)
-------------------------------------------
when i saw a picture of this sculpture, it just brought back all the visuals of that day. for me it was too graphic so for those who still want to see it click the link.

[SonyGuy]

I have to agree with what was said in the article. I don't think any harm was meant but I would also agree that it was a little too graphic to be a public display. I don't think any of the family members of those who leaped to their death would approve of it either...

[NuTs62]

Originally posted by SonyGuy
I have to agree with what was said in the article. I don't think any harm was meant but I would also agree that it was a little too graphic to be a public display. I don't think any of the family members of those who leaped to their death would approve of it either...

:stupid:

Their lives should be remembered, not a reminder to everyone of how they perished.

[ribitch]

people just like to bitch about whatever they can. Its designed to remember the victims. Embrace that, not bitch about it.

[NuTs62]

Originally posted by ribitch
people just like to bitch about whatever they can. Its designed to remember the victims. Embrace that, not bitch about it.

yea.. i'm sure it was.. it was a depiction of the events by an artist.. and i'm sure it was well intended.. but not every well-intended thing is meant for public viewing.

[johnnymk]

Got/BadTaste?
What do you expect... It's New York

[whitak24]

i don't think it was in poor taste, i just think it wasn't the best choice.

for something like that to be exhibited in a gallery is fine, imo. but i think to showcase it in public is too likely to hurt too many people who aren't expecting to see something so graphic on their way to work in the morning.

[Nija]

I saw nothing wrong with the statue. It's *gasp* (I can't believe I'm saying this) Art. It's a visual representation of that event. A very appropraite <sp?> one, in my opinion. Granted it's graphic. But, oh well.
edit:
Which are you going to remember more clearly: The goatce guy or a CK add?
Point: The goatce guy because it's a more intense image. You are less likely to forget. I think this sculpture is that same way.

[whitak24]

Originally posted by Nija
I saw nothing wrong with the statue. It's *gasp* (I can't believe I'm saying this) Art. It's a visual representation of that event. A very appropraite <sp?> one, in my opinion. Granted it's graphic. But, oh well.
edit:
Which are you going to remember more clearly: The goatce guy or a CK add?
Point: The goatce guy because it's a more intense image. You are less likely to forget. I think this sculpture is that same way.
wtf is the goatce guy? :confused:

and i have no problem with art. i think art needs to be presented in the correct venue, however.

[eSDee]

Originally posted by whitak24
i don't think it was in poor taste, i just think it wasn't the best choice.

for something like that to be exhibited in a gallery is fine, imo. but i think to showcase it in public is too likely to hurt too many people who aren't expecting to see something so graphic on their way to work in the morning.

Took the words right outta my...hands? I agree. I think that this artwork might be a little too graphic to be just out in the open somewhere. I think it is a powerful piece and I do believe that it has a place somewhere, but just somewhere where the viewers will be prepared for it. If it's out in the open for just anyone to see, it can turn someones day to crap in an instant.

Oh and the guy and the article who says this isn't art is an idiot.

[avlena]

if this isn't art, or shouldn't be displayed, then perhaps they should take down any pieces of art(photographs, statues, etc) portraying the WWII concentration camps, the aftermath of Hiroshima, etc. Art isn't always lovey-dovey romantic scenes...a lot of times there's a lot of pain being protrayed. I think that in 5,10 years, people might WANT to see this statue displayed, because it invokes such a gut-wrenching reaction that it will help our children and grandchildren understand what we went through on that day. But its a bit too fresh in our minds right now, hence people's vehement reactions against it. so, it's not an issue of whether or not the statue truly is "art" or in the wrong venue, or in poor taste, but rather one of time...

[avlena]

btw, goatce is a really nasty website that dipicts a guy displaying things you NEVER wanted to see... :P my boyfriend keeps trying to trick me into visiting the site (unfortunatly, he succeeded once!)

[topane]

Originally posted by whitak24

wtf is the goatce guy? :confused:
Check your PM -- there's a link. It's the most disgusting thing you've ever seen.

[whitak24]

Originally posted by topane
Check your PM -- there's a link. It's the most disgusting thing you've ever seen.
um, thanks. i guess :2far:

that is a weird pic. it looks like some photochopping to me....or else that dude has done some REALLY NASTY things to himself that i don't even want to hear about :eek:

[Nija]

Originally posted by whitak24

and i have no problem with art. i think art needs to be presented in the correct venue, however.

and the correct venue for this statue is...?

(FYI i'm not trying to be a dick about it, I'm honestly curious)

A private collection, in a art museuem, what?

[Ladogaboy]

Originally posted by Nija


and the correct venue for this statue is...?

(FYI i'm not trying to be a dick about it, I'm honestly curious)

A private collection, in a art museuem, what?

A public plaza if you ask me. :shrug:

The world can't always be viewed through rose-colored glasses. :rolleyes:

[eSDee]

Originally posted by Ladogaboy


A public plaza if you ask me. :shrug:

The world can't always be viewed through rose-colored glasses. :rolleyes:

How about we start screening footage of the days events to our Kindergarten classes all over the US? Better to let them know ahead of time, that life is not a bed of roses and they better watch their backs. How does that sound? :rolleyes:

[whitak24]

Originally posted by Ladogaboy


A public plaza if you ask me. :shrug:

The world can't always be viewed through rose-colored glasses. :rolleyes:
i disagree. i think that putting it in a public museum in an exhibit of art inspired by the tragedy would be most appropriate.

it has nothing to do with viewing the world through rose-colored glasses. if your loved one was killed by bashing their head through a car windshield, would you want to see a sculpture of a person with their head stuck through a windshield on your way to work?

in the same way, there are people in NYC for whom this was a very painful tragedy and for all they knew, their wife jumped from the 110th floor. to subject them to seeing this sort of artwork in a random, public, place (read: not in an art exhibit) is inappropriate, imo.

[sbp]

First the firefighters statue was ruined by political correctness and now this. :disa:

[Ladogaboy]

Originally posted by whitak24

i disagree. i think that putting it in a public museum in an exhibit of art inspired by the tragedy would be most appropriate.

it has nothing to do with viewing the world through rose-colored glasses. if your loved one was killed by bashing their head through a car windshield, would you want to see a sculpture of a person with their head stuck through a windshield on your way to work?

in the same way, there are people in NYC for whom this was a very painful tragedy and for all they knew, their wife jumped from the 110th floor. to subject them to seeing this sort of artwork in a random, public, place (read: not in an art exhibit) is inappropriate, imo.

Maybe, but either way, you are restricting someone's rights by not letting them publicly express themselves. For all we know, the artist lost a loved one in the WTC and this is his way of dealing with it. :shrug:

IMO, covering this statue up is almost as bad as our friend Rudy defiling the Virgin Mary. Only in New York. :rolleyes: