About Advertise
Art, Culture
Sea Point Public Art

Walking the Road

by Linda Stupart / 06.09.2011

When I asked my photographer friend, Rose Kotze, if she’d accompany me on a sunset walk on the Sea Point promenade to photograph “Walking the Road” the new public art generally referred to as those “damn dragonfly things”, our conversation went as follows:

Rose: Dude, I hate those fucking sculptures. What do they even mean?
Me: They’re about democracy apparently. A fledgling South Africa reaching out…
Rose: Huh?
Me: It was her masters project for Wits.
Rose: I thought they were just for pedophiles to jerk off to.

Of course, since this is the standard response to these sculptures from any human being with an ounce of criticality in their consciousness it might seem unnecessary to even acknowledge their existence, placement and pervasiveness. However they have just been given a further two year lifespan and are markers of a much bigger issue of the protocol and processes for commissioning, placing and reception of public art in Cape Town, and throughout the country.

Sea Point Dragonflies

For anyone who hasn’t seen these sculptures and isn’t suitably underwhelmed by the impressive photographs – “Walking the Road” is a series of 18 concrete sculptures on the promenade showing a sweet little arian-featured girl in an adorable red striped bathing costume reaching plaintively towards a dragonfly, and then, eventually, touching it, holding it, and becoming it. Twee, meaningless and awkwardly placed in the middle of the path, these little sculptures would be mostly harmless or, at least, only visually offensive, if it weren’t for the remarkable “artist’s statement” available on both the “Walking the Road” website and written in some cheap faux-cursive font on the plaque adorning the first sculpture:

It is a great privilege to tell this story to my fellow South Africans as a homage to all who in their daily civilian life make the choice to “Walk the Road” and in so doing build a nation that is able to fly.

The Little Girl in my fable-like interpretation thus represents a young South African democracy and the Dragonfly visualises a dream of freedom, equality and hope that we as a nation persue[sic].

On a personal level, it is also a reminder to each of us of the hope that we individually live for and of the dreams that mark our lives, our own story.

Walking the Road, Sea Point Art

Of course, I don’t feel I need to point out to readers how ridiculous this is; offensive, even, to anyone with any knowledge, let alone those who actually lived the experience of political struggle in South Africa. That this project is apparently a “live experiment” testing the basic tenets of artist Marieke Prinsloo-Rowe’s Wits Masters thesis about contemporary manifestations of tableaux vivant is certainly no comfort, and also leads to serious questioning of the tertiary education system in South Africa. These plaques and the sculptures’ huge plinths, which borrow from the language of the monument and memorial, also force the sculptures outside the realm of innocuous decoration, into the world of “art”, and very bad art at that.

It should also be pointed out that even when considered as mindless décor, the massive, already crumbling concrete plinths disrupt the very functionality of the boardwalk, intervening physically as opposed to critically in the everyday usage of the promenade making jogging and walking in pairs very difficult.

But all this aside, the real issue about these sculptures is how they got there in the first place.

Walking the Road, Sea Point Art

Unlike other public art there was no consultation with any arts governing body (yes they exist, and function even), rather the sculptures were offered at no cost to the city by the artist and accepted without consultation, with the agreement that they are on temporary loan for a year. Said year, however, has passed and the sculptures are still there, again with no consultation with arts bodies or for that matter, the broader public (whoever they may be).

When asked for comment, Jonathan Garnham, of the Visual Arts Network South Africa (VANSA) was democratically silent about the sculptures, but did comment that: Cape Town, with a population of over three million people, and aspirations of being a world- class destination, does not yet have a public art policy in place. Such a policy would put public art on the agenda whenever a government building is built by allocating a small percentage to art. A public art policy would put mechanisms in place that would deal with unsolicited proposals from artists, and would, ideally, lead to more art in the public sphere which would enhance the quality of life of the city’s inhabitants.

However, when I contacted the Sea Point Ward Councilor, Beverley Schafer, about the processes for erecting the sculptures, she responded that at a Sea Point Ward Forum the Sea Point ratepayers were “happy with the decision” to keep the sculptures there for another two years. “I must add,” Schafer continued, “that the artist paid for the sculptures herself and invested over R300 000 in the sculptures. She also, at her own expense, maintains them.” This, then, seems to be the crux of the matter: That Prinsloo-Rowe is provided considerable space in the public sphere because she has the money to produce and maintain (albeit very shoddily, the works are already falling apart at the ankles) the work herself, in essence buying exposure and ownership of public space. Councilor J.P Smit, who was responsible for the sculptures’ erection (as well as the recent controversial “clean up” of the Sea Point area) had not responded by the time of publication.

In a city with such a dearth of public art, and a gaping schism between artists and the public, are these girlflies, and their ridiculous pseudo-political rhetoric really what we should be offering up to the country as exemplary of our artistic production?

Of course it’s also very easy just to keep them forever. I mean people like them right?

Sea Point Boardwalk Art

22   21
  1. wwwiT says:

    Nice article Linda, the journalistic stance adds intellectual rigor and thoroughness.
    it is important to note that Councilor J.P Smit is the same person responsible for the partitioning of Cape Town’s graffiti bylaw, impemented last year.

    I believe that the site is incredibly conspicuous on two levels. Firstly, in the way that you mentioned, that fact that their was or has been very little public consultation in the process of the works’ placement, spatially and in the publics’ face. The second is how the promionade and indeed the works themselves, peer towards Robben Island. The monumental spending that has been put into the two national flagship projects, Robben Island and more recently Freedom Park in Pretoria has been done to the detriment of other instances of public memorials and sculptures in South Africa. Even the void of Graafs Pool that these works’ too peek over, scars the landscape in conservative politic and a lack of public decision making processes.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  2. elachi says:

    Linda, you hit the nail on the head with your commentary. I can’t believe that the City has allowed those dreadful sculptures to stay on the Promenade for another two years.
    I used to love and regularly walk on the Promenade but have stopped doing so since those sculptures were installed because they offend me so profoundly. They are awfully made, have zero intellectual content and interrupt the physical environment in a way that makes using the space uncomfortable.

    I think we should organise an art intervention where we hire an earth moving equipment and toss them onto the rocks. It can be our very own “extreme makeover”.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  3. Karin says:

    You should all read Firewalker – a new release by Fourthwall books. There is a growing debate on public sculpture in South Africa and the book includes a number of essays with varying perspectives and insights into public sculpture and monuments in Johannesburg, and Firewalker; the 2009 sculpture by Gerard Marx and William Kentridge. fourthwallbooks.com

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  4. Captain Lombard says:

    I think if those tasteless plaques weren’t on there – spelling out everything the way the artist wants us to see – then it could actually be art. And doesn’t need to be political at all – it can be something completely different, whatever it is you want it to mean.

    The real problem are those plaques.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  5. nissim says:

    A true embarassment.
    And way past its shelf life.
    The typography on the plaques alone deems them worthy of a Bin-Laden-like exeunt – about 3km offshore. (Rose should have taken a pic of a plaque for all to squirm over).
    Come to think of it, my five year old could take better pix with a phone camera. Maybe that’s Rose’s intention – better pix would detract from the thrust of the “bad art” argument?

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  6. Roger Young says:

    And @Nissim starts the “let’s detract from the true debate” thrust.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  7. Hugh says:

    Any insight into the gloss white small-ish horse molds with stainless steel funnels protruding out of their orifice’s? They were just chilling on the grass near the green point side of the Promenade last time I was there

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  8. nissim says:

    @RY – Oh, so we have to keep within the Politburo tramlines do we? Is mine not fair comment?
    So I think the pix are pretty poor and you get all precious?
    I’m writing as a Sea Point resident pissed off that a Gauteng student dumped on my doorstep (and didn’t bring a poop bag)… not a public-art or cultural theorist. I just know kak when I see it.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  9. jackson says:

    @nissim: please get your 5 year old to take some pics. I cant wait to see them.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  10. Anonymous says:

    Lol talk about criticising bad art, those photos are crap. straight up.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  11. Roger Young says:

    I think you’re all missing the point. The photographs are of bad art, how can they be great pictures when the subject is terrible?

    Do you want images that prettify the issue?

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  12. Elliot says:

    Linda, I think the three points that summarise your article are that
    the sculptures are a bit ugly/intrusive/annoying,
    they attempt to deal with very serious subject matter in an inappropriately playful way
    they are only there because the artist is privileged enough to buy their presence, as no committee exists to decide on the handling of public art

    I agree with you on all three, but I think that a lot of the bulk of the article is however, at least in tone, loaded with artworld snobbery. Decrying them as “very bad art” the way you did is not going to come across well in any form of public debate, neither is deriding the public in general for probably liking the sculptures, probably due to their consciousness’ lack of criticality.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  13. Anonymous says:

    you can easily take good photos of those sculptures. the second ones not even exposed properly. also how the fuck does it make it hard to jog in pairs just go round the fucking things.
    guess it would have been ok if they said they shot badly on purpose, but they didnt. she also said her photographer friend. people claim to be things they are not way too much in cape town, as the artical states they really should look at the tertiary education system here.
    not saying i like the sculptures either. but still u dont have to prove there shit by taking shit photos, people can make their minds up themselves without being subconciously tricked.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  14. Roger Young says:

    It’s not about photographic trickery. The photo’s are of the sculptures. They are, in fact, properly exposed; if there is such a thing.

    Rose Kotze is a photographer. It’s not a claim, it’s a fact.

    When the promenade is full, it is hard to job around the sculptures as they take up a lot of space.

    Also, if you read the article, you’ll see that this is not what the debate around the sculptures is about. It’s about public art policy and the lack of one.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  15. nissim says:

    My bad.
    Got it all wrong.
    Rose is actually a genius.
    … And a pioneer of a new genre of photography – the Bad Art School that consciously unflatters images of bad art – just so nobody gets any mixed messages.
    So thoughtful, and thought-provoking at the same time. Nice one Rose. Now why didn’t I think of that myself…

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  16. Roger Young says:


    I’d probably take you seriously if you could construct a sentence properly.

    On second thoughts, I probably wouldn’t.

    You don’t like the Dragonfly girls which exist in real space, undermine the formation of a public art policy, are badly constructed and disrupt public space but you would rather argue about some photographs that are just there to illustrate the subject of the story.

    Whether the photographs are “good” or “bad” or whatever, is not the freaking point. But you’re so far up your own ass that you’d rather argue this ad infinitum. One day you’re going to wake up and there will be a sculpture of a salmon and cream cheese bagel made out of diamante blocking your view.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  17. nissim says:

    @RY – easy Tiger, try read the first half of my original comment. (before you got all hit-up about my photo jibe)

    I obviously think it’s totally offensive. Both the art, and the fact that there are no safeguards and “due processes” in place to ensure these public obscenities aren’t replicated whenever some self-absorbed, self-financing airhead wants to pooh in public.

    Now, back to my schtick: Rose Kotze… Rose Kotze… wasn’t she the one who took those banal, self-absorbed portraits of waspy kids from toffee schools and passed it off as art. A Masters thesis, I believe. Hmmm…

    PS China, I can wrap senteces round you llike a python, if I’d choose to. But that would make it feel like work to me. I’m here for fun – in case you hadn’t realized. (And I generally like you, and your comments)

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  18. Anonymous says:

    wait until some chunk of concrete elbow or dragonfly wing falls on some kids head, those things will be out of there before you can say “sue”…
    those things must go>

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  19. Anonymous says:

    Did it occur to anyone that they are MEANT to be bad photographs. Sheesh.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  20. Roger Young says:


    You’ve obviously got personal beef with Rose. (Hits ignore button)

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  21. nissim says:

    @rog – and that’s your sole take-out!

    before you start saying “here we go again…” – here’s something to pondo (sic): this wouldn’t have become the subject of 10 or so comments (and counting) … if you would have just let my jibe ride, and taken out the essence of my comment.

    then again, its not unusual for Mahala’s comments to overshadow the original argument. Isn’t that what makes it such a compelling read?

    re: my beef with Rose – I literally couldn’t recall the name when I made my original comment – only joined the dots later.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  22. jonathan garnham says:

    Was I “democratically silent”?
    Is that an oxymoron?

    To maybe get things back on track-
    “Cape Town, with a population of over three million people, and aspirations of being a world- class destination, does not yet have a public art policy in place. Such a policy would put public art on the agenda whenever a government building is built by allocating a small percentage to art. A public art policy would put mechanisms in place that would deal with unsolicited proposals from artists, and would, ideally, lead to more art in the public sphere which would enhance the quality of life of the city’s inhabitants.”

    This is, for me, the main point. It’s our city, let’s get our shit together

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  23. vuyo seripe says:

    one more reason not to visit cape town.

    great article, lots of ugly shit sculptures in Jozi too… something needs to be done about it. I believe in art looking beautiful before any kind of commentary.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  24. the present says:

    Thank you for doing some research, and finally kicking off some appropriately critical discussion on this visual shame. I’ve also gone to the promenade less now, because these things are a shame to be close to. This ill-conceived ‘installation’ sucks any energy I bring there away with its politically pretentious and aesthetically numb presence. Being close to them in that space feels like being at the wrong party, smiling at racist jokes, too scared to leave in case of what the neighbors will say. I think the fact that the artist’s daddy clearly has enough money to indulge her hobby is license enough for anyone to creatively engage with them as raw-material for a new work – including reducing them to abstract rubble-and-wire-mesh mounds with graffiti stains (to be cleared away at the artist dad’s expense).

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  25. Anonymous says:

    @vuyo: art doesn’t need to be beautiful to be relevant. We are ALL so so sad that you don’t want to visit us now. There are rivers of tears flowing.

    There’s a fine line between a drab city, devoid of art, and one that allows for self expression at the expense of others. Graffiti is one of these blurred lines.

    These sculptures on the promenade were put there without the consent of the citizens. This needs to be done through a body who ‘deem’ something worthy. Most people hate these silly sculptures.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  26. Poster says:

    I don’t know. Shits look okay to me. Or whatever, really. Something to look at when blazed, I guess.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  27. YsterHart says:

    Speaking of trivializing heavy moments of our history, or buying into the struggle with cash, have you lot seen those bizzare chibi political figures at the Waterfront, just outside of musica? They’re bordering on levels of crassness with the giant Mandela in Sandton Square.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  28. SA might not have developed public art policy, and many might not like the dragonfly girl, but at least someone had passion and energy to put something there. Who else is ready to put their work up for public enjoyment and scrutiny? Consultation processes may be weak, but free expression still holds power. Let’s grow public art, not kill it.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  29. Fred Durst says:


    There are many artists who are ready for public enjoyment and scrutiny, as you put it, but they do not have the money to be able to self fund their work. Can you not see how the placement of these sculptures, by skirting proper policy, is the same as corruption?

    If I have the money to ensure it’s never cleaned up, am I allowed to take a shit on the pavement outside your house for your scrutiny and enjoyment?

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  30. ComeON says:

    HAHAHAHAHAHA you guys are arguing over ‘what is good art’ LOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLLLLLLLL

    oh do, please tell us what this ‘good art’ is, dear experts????

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  31. Anonymous says:


    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  32. mE says:

    This is so sad. Since when did we have the ART POLICE? Come on guys, there are surely more important things to worry about.
    I personally like them and know a whole bunch of people who agree. Yes, we may be simpletons, not fine-tuned to the inner-politics and navel gazing of true artists/ art critics, but hey, if there is someone out there who is willing to make an effort to make our city a more interesting place and if it is not offensive – I say GET OVER IT!

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  33. Fred Durst says:

    But it is offensive.

    It’s offensive because it’s not democratic and it’s in public space.

    Are you that stupid?

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  34. Anonymous says:

    These sculptures have the same taste as Rose Kotzes white suburban rich kid portraits. They’re both bad for the same reason. Aside from the public display of these concrete cliches. Rose and her rich parents funded her exhibition as well. Funny that she took these ‘intentionally’ bad photos, and was critical of someone who is doing privilaged art one notch up from Rose herself. Her critical commentary must be born out of basic jealousy. No personal issues with Rose, never met her, but what she speaks with her art are boring mumbles and cliches and entitlement.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  35. WEugene says:

    Oh man, I hate these sculptures and hate those nasty font descriptions of what we as unwitting passersby are told to to understand about this art.It is a nasty case of “the cutes” – go and put them somewhere else now. Please. Their time is up. I thought the horses with a trumpet up their backsides were supposed to replace this crock.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  36. wwwiT says:

    ^^ lols ^^

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  37. jelly-bean says:

    Bad article on bad art with bad photo’s to illustrate…
    @Fred Durst – while I agree with you that it’s offensive because it’s not democratic and in a public space – isnt this exactly what we are dealing with in this country at the moment?
    What is democracy anyway,and who decides..?

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  38. ODIDI says:

    For an insightful and well written article, its not about public policy for public art but the absolute disdain and disregard for Artists, the Artist and Creative Community and what we know and our value to this city, is glaring.
    JP Smith is everything I don’t want for Cape Town, his essence is racist, homophobic and the worst kind of ultra conservative.
    So much more could have been done with the Hard Rock Cafe sight, than this sad ugly food food “flea” market. The destruction of Graaf’s Pool, done in the name of crime, was a homophobic reaction to cruising there has left a dangerous jumble of concrete that blights the scenery. And the by-law that allows the police to frisk anyone on the street is just wrong and unconstitutional. The patrolling is great but don’t put your hands on me.
    These sculptures were never temporary. Those White Horses that one is supposed to talk into and hear, were also imposed on our beautiful Promanade.
    Brilliant and Beautiful works of ART could be displayed along and on this Breathtaking Public Space.
    But people are so eager to protect the past and stagnate the creative growth of our city, that they don’t see the potential for exquisite beauty and unity in diversity.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  39. Kian says:

    The sculptures are kitch but accessible. I do think however that Linda’s problem the work stems from a personal perspective. The work was not created by one of her UCT Art School buddies. She’s forever complimenting her buddies in the press and bad mouthing everybody else.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  40. Anonymous says:

    Rose: I thought they were just for pedophiles to jerk off to.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  41. Mike Miller (USA) says:

    I love the art form. I’d never seen it before as I’m too far away. Its fresh and very original. What a draw this must be for Sea Point. A bit of good art and sculpture is wonderful for the soul. Strength to the artist and the authorities who did it.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  42. Anonymous says:

    ugly avant garde art for a public that wants pretty things. Contemporary artists are so god damned arrogant

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  43. Anonymous says:

    @ Anonymous: September 8, 2011 at 1:50 pm

    Agreed, these pretentious little rich kid twats are common place in this city. Arrogant little cool kids who talk more than they walk. Rose’s comment, along with her ‘exhibition’ explains her dodgy photos in this article. The justification of it is even more hilarious! Why would someone deliberately take a badly composed, over exposed photo?

    Anyway, I’m fully with Fred Durst here. The fact that her parents could drop 300k on her little artsy fart wank DOES NOT mean they are worthy of being inflicted on the citizens. If that’s the case then we’ll only ever have pretentious crap displayed. Our city needs to take public art seriously. We need a qualified panel of designers and artists to help make these decisions, and we need funds to be directed at worthy artists who have contributions to make.

    I would love to walk the promenade and see all sorts of sculptures from all sorts of artists. Things could be rotated around the city. The city could ‘buy’ these pieces from artists and it would stimulate the local art economy.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  44. LP says:

    @Roger Young – Don’t feed the trolls man – you know nothing good ever comes from it. @nissim – You’ve just taken the most irrelevant part of the article and made it the subject of debate. Well done.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  45. Sum43 says:

    Personally I don’t want the city using my tax money to fund artists whose work i think is shit. Fuck them. Then I want the city to tax cape town’s fucking ass so i can write shit poetry and recite it in long street. Leave the fucking tax money alone and go fix some roads and pay public servants better or something. Let the city give allocate safe public spaces for artists to display their work and rotate it. If people like what they see it will build artists’ reputations and it will keep things interesting and diverse. A ‘panel of design experts’ can go fuck themselves. Who the fuck has the right to decide what constitutes good art – that’s pretty subjective, and I don’t think many people give a fuck how many coked up years they spent in their design courses – it doesn’t qualify them to force their idea of good art down my fucking throat at my expense. Fucksakes.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  46. zappablaster says:

    Thanks for the article…

    The main point is not whether everyone likes or does not like the sculptures that are – to my mind also – defiling a beautiful if too-sterile space, but that there was no consultation, no attempt at reflecting either diversity, artistic prowess or any other dimension one could reasonably expect to be incorporated in such a big decision on the use of public space.

    The idea of public sculptures on the Sea Point promenade is GREAT – if there is a system of proper curating, with sculptures being replaced on, say, a yearly level, this would to my mind enrich the promenade experience significantly – to the extent (if one wants this) of even becoming a tourist/cultural attraction. And, of course, it would give a chance to very many struggling and under-represented artists to actually have their work seen in a place where there is more than enough space for it… Almost all attempts at adding some kind of extra life to the promenade have been blocked either by the municipality or by local residents… but the point is that the promenade is one of the few public spaces in Cape Town that is actually shared by everyone, and does not only belong to locals… And having a selection of work from different local artists would definitely make walking there a more interesting and pleasurable experience…

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  47. wildatheart says:

    @Sum43 – sounds you having a bad come down from a heavy coked up session yourself..”go pay some civil servants better..”? Huh?
    What black hole have you been living in for the last few years? My guess is you know a lot about nothing and nothing about art and just stumbled into Mahala by mistake… shaky fingers that hit the keyboard without direction or purpose.
    Take your foul mouth someplace else where it doesnt create a stench…better still – get back to your black hole…and buy yourself a dictionary while you’re about it and learn some decent words.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  48. Herman Lategan says:

    I agree, consultation should take place. But with whom exactly? And then? Are we going to have more sculptures erected of Nelson Mandela? I’m certain of this, because a committee like that will have to politically correct, reflecting the zietgeist of totally boring and bland political struggle art. Every road, school and hospital is already named after him. Why not follow the trend of generic PC Politburo art, we replace each sculpture with an exact replica of Nelson Mandela. Then everybody will be happy, but just remember hey, they must all look the same. No place for diversity, no sireee. We have all follow one narrative, only one. I hold no torch for those sculptures, may I tell you, but there is something whimsical and fairytale-like about them. Just as with those horses. And when I see children enjoying touching and looking at them, it makes me happy, And there is nothing wrong with the pictures. OK, excuse me now, while I listen to Radio Nelson Mandela, read my novel about Nelson Mandela, wear my Nelson Mandela T-shirt and oops, go and see a Nelson Mandela opera later. Yes, truly, we need art that will reflect political narratives on our beachfront, so that we can all march to same drum, as we already are. How refreshing.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  49. whatevea says:

    Love it Herman!
    I’m surprised we haven’t been subjected to a law to legally force us to change all our names to Nelson Mandela.Always a bad idea to name anything after a politician anyway…what happens when the ANC is out and Julius is in?No doubt we will all be travelling eastwards on Malema Boulevard,name changed at tax payers expense once again…

    I have nothing against the girl or her dragon-fly..she’s a darn sight more inspirational than a peek at some of the drivel that passes for relevant art in some of our top galleries.But lets be forward looking and put some chubby bronzes of Julius on those plinths before they crumble away…

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  50. Anonymous says:

    Sum43: have you, before in your life, come into contact with the term ‘curator’ before?

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  51. the present says:

    I can’t believe all this back and forthing here.

    To summarise: the sculptures are fucking ugly, and (almost) nobody likes them. There is no proper procedure in place for getting such sculptures into the public realm – it was private, vested-interest money that got them there, and is keeping them there. Something has to be done to remove them, and to prevent this from happening again.

    The most interesting thing that’s come up here is the lack of faith in PC-muzzled curatorial teams pushing through anything a)aesthetically pleasing/progressive/interesting and b)a- or un-political, or politically unfashionable.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  52. Anonymous says:

    A whole new genre in art making: Consultation Art.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  53. Catherine says:

    I am shocked at all this disgusting commentary! With the filth in your adjectives,it shows your lack of knowledge and your sour grapes! Get your facts straight before passing judgement! You have no clue as to how hard the artist works and that she funded the project alone!!!!
    I can only assume that you are would be but failing artists because your jealousy and hatred for beautiful work and a brilliant artist is so apparent and terribly pathetic!

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  54. Anonymous says:

    frED durst is just sad because no one will give him money for his crap art

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  55. Debbie says:

    I’m with Elliot.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  56. Sam says:

    Why don’t we ask her to remove them? Has anyone tried?

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  57. Insouciant says:

    Is it a coincidence that this article is crafted in the same manner as the accused subject? After wringing Linda Stupart from out of the entanglement of hyperbole, one is left with little more than a one legged rant.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  58. Dan says:

    JP Smith and Marieke Prinsloo are lovers. They go to Graafs pool at night and lick each others bums under the ambient glow of the city lights. I have seen them.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  59. ArtseyFartsey says:

    Good news -> At least one of the sculptures has finally been removed. Well, half-removed … ok, vandalized … but “vandalized” makes it sound like it’s a bad thing.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  60. Anonymous says:

    Thanks Linda – I love art, public art especially, but have found those works deeply offensive. However, it is really positive that these (really truly awful) artworks have illustrated the potential of the promenade for public art – public space in CT and especially that of the promenade should be a place for art.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  61. Anonymous says:

    PS – I love the photos actually. Some of them capture so well the ridiculousness of these stupid sculptures. And bad art or not, the composition is great.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  62. Anonymous says:

    I love it when trolls can sink their teeth into the week and vulnerable with wild allegations and unsubstantiated claims. It is great to know nobody will chase me down and hold me accountable for my words. It’s like vandalizing a sculpture, raping a child.

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  63. Philip de Vos says:

    This vitriolic article – especially the so-called conversation at the beginning between the artist and her photographer friend – with mentioning of pedophilia – is something that should be greeted with the disgust it deserves – and why on earth is there no-one monitoring some of the reponses?

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  64. Amrpali says:

    We went on a walk on the promenade on Sunday and saw those slecpturus. I have to be honest and admit that we were not crazy about them but that is what art is all about some people like certain things some don’t and we all have got reasons or emotions motivating our tastes in terms of art!But now that I have seen those shots well i have changed my mind and i love that little seen through your eyes Carmen! You are bloody talented! You are an artist!Well shot!

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0

  65. Tommy says:

    I’m relaly into it, thanks for this great stuff!

    Thumb up0   Thumb down 0