Grumman S-2 Embarrasment

[Warbird Kid]

I don't think it's offensive, tasteless, or any of the other adjectives thrown around in this thread.

It's not my cup o'tea as far as art is concerned, but then again most of the stuff in any random art gallery isn't, either.

If I had a family member that died in a CDF or a Tracker crash, I'd be thinking of much better ways to cherish their memory than looking for a way to be offended by this. So what -- it's metal that used to be an airplane and used to be a hulk rotting away. I'm way more irritated by a formerly beautiful hulk sitting in a field rotting away than I am one that at least serves some sort of purpose!

Here here! I follow your logic of thinking on this one Randy!

[Cherrybomber13]

I feel like I need to chime in with my unique perspective.
As most of you know I am a Museum guy and now the Director of a Museum. From that side it kills me to see a displayable airframe used in such a way. I would have preferred to see something like this end up at a park or something, or even with those guys who make tables out of airplanes. I have a good friend in Baltimore who was a crew chief on one of these and he would be sick.

I also live 14 miles north of Ground Zero, so seeing crashed planes in a city gives me a bit of a sour stomach. I don't expect everyone to know that feeling but since I missed being in Tower 2 that bad day by a phone call that morning it freaks me a little bit. I can't speak directly for , but I'm sure most members of the CDF who have lost crew would feel the same way, and it a bit insensitive.

But I am also a Photographer and believe in the 1st Amendment, and free speech for artists.

In the 1971 case of Cohen v. California, U. S. Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan II succinctly summarized the inherent subjectivity of determining artistic merit when he stated, "one man's vulgarity is another's lyric." Given that works of art often evoke such diverse and passionate responses, it is not surprising that artistic expression is the target of so many censorship efforts.
by Michael Lebron

The commitment to freedom of imagination and expression is deeply embedded in our national psyche, buttressed by the First Amendment, and supported by a long line of Supreme Court decisions.

The First Amendment is based upon the belief that in a free and democratic society, individual adults must be free to decide for themselves what to read, write, paint, draw, see and hear. If we are disturbed by images of violence or sex, we can change the channel, turn off the TV, and decline to go to certain movies or museum exhibits.

We can also exercise our own free speech rights by voicing our objections to forms of expression that we don't like.

ACLU

IMHO It all comes down to this... Many of us on WIX live in an amazing place called the United States of America, where we might not support others ideas or actions, but if they are protected by our Constitution, I for one will die to protect them. I lived in Philly back in 05, it's really a great town. The choice of this "Art" display in Philly is controversial, and it is making people talk. When people talk, hopefully they think. Thinking is good.

IBTL

[Jiggersfromsphilly]

One thing that has been overlooked in this discussion is the fact that the work is located in front of a museum that contains hundreds of millions of dollars worth of art work. They have extensive security that is above and beyond a convenience store or bank branch. Who know who may view this work and purchase it and put it on display in a different venue or manner that is not being looked at in this forum. The glass is half full gentlemen.

[12XU2A3X3]

it's awesome, philly rules, don't stifle artistic expression you sound like a prude.

[12XU2A3X3]

and there's a C-1 properly displayed if you head about 15 miles north on broad street

[mustangdriver]

More importantly, where is the Rocky statue?

[Jiggersfromsphilly]

More importantly, where is the Rocky statue?

On the right side of the steps he ran up at the Philadelphia Museum of Art. Not to be confused with the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Art ! on Broad Street !

[mustangdriver]

Thanks! Sorry my italian heritage is showing, HAHA

[Randune]

I'm obviously in the minority here.... but I really like it.
If the plane was as junky as others have said and destined for the scrap yard, I think its better like this than aluminum pots and pans.

[rwdfresno]

Personally I don't find that paticular bit of art all that compelling. I have to agree with the previous poster that I find stuff like this much more interesting.

I guess to put things in perspective things like this a lot more disturbing in my opinion. The unfortunate thing is that for many of these types that aren't sought after by high end collectors you are likely to find a lot more derilict hulks out there than you are going to find organizations/individuals who are interested in preserving them. I can think of two instances recently where there were opportunities for well meaning aircraft preservationisits to step up. The cache of Sikorsky H-34s and the field full of Grumman S-2s that were sitting there just waiting to be obtained at a cost that nearly any average Joe can afford. From what I understnad there were very few takers.

Let's face it this isn't a priceless artifact as much as we all wish 4 dozen of every type could be preserved. I really think Randy makes a good point about finding a reason to be offended by the display. There are many fols on this site who believe that dragging the carcass of "Lady Be Good" back to the US and staging as she crashed is the most noble thing you could do for that aircraft and it's crew. I can buy that debate. I'm not sure using this aircraft, that mind you nobody actually crashed and died in that I am aware of, for a differnet but similarly themed display is a slight to anyone who has ever died in a CDF crash.

Anyway, I guess my point is that anyone with the arguement that this is either a priceless artifact that would otherwise be preserved prestinely in a museum or that this is a slap in the face to someone I think is really stretching.

Ryan

[Mark Allen M]

.

Last edited by Mark Allen M on Sat Sep 08, 2012 12:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[svengi]

I kinda like it. It's compelling. The lines and arrangement are interesting. In contrast with the display being disrespectful to Cal fire pilots and families, I hadn't even heard of Cal fire before this thread. Now I've at least checked out their webpage and read a little on their aircraft operations. The artist didn't use the plane to try to create a realistic or ghoulish depiction of a crash scene, it rather looks like a symbolic fallen aircraft. If anything the display in Cal fire paint relates to me the risk and sacrifice of fire bomber crews. It seems to me a tribute to bravery and reminder of the risks taken on citizen's behalf to fight fires, which probably wasn't the artist's intent, but everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

[andyman64]

honestly i was initially offended by this piece of work BUT after reading what it stands for i am all for it there ar still alot of these air frames and this one was no good a fitting tribute to those that fought and died for our freedom and fighting fires!

[TonyM]

Reminds me of the DC-3 down in Florida that belonged to some museum that was put on the side of the road, pushed over on its nose like it had crashed and they hung a dummy in a parachute from the tail.

That was for Kermit Weeks' Fantasy of Flight Museum. I was disappointed to see it removed. Not distasteful at all. The Philly art is interesting.

[TonyM]

Some were outraged about the DC-3 in Florida:





http://www.douglasdc3.com/protest/protest.htm



TM