Caporegime
That's purely your assumption though. Therefore are you not projecting your stereotypical views on to this mural? For all you lnow the artist may have intended 2, 4 and 5 to be Jewish.
Anti-semitic is a bit of a push, no?
- Thread starter NVP
- Start date
That's purely your assumption though. Therefore are you not projecting your stereotypical views on to this mural? For all you lnow the artist may have intended 2, 4 and 5 to be Jewish.
So the ones without large, caricatured noses and without certain types of facial hair!
OK I was joking somewhat previously but you seem to have joined Dan 'lightbulb' in this view!
Are you not 'projecting' your view that the mural depicts older white men? How do you know that the artist intended to depict that?
Could be a bunch of non age conforming, trans racial, non cis conforming, gender queer lesbians for all you know!
Given that the author states the mural depicts 'white anglo' individuals and Jewish individuals I think it's a reasonable assumption to go with the ones displaying commonly held stereotypes of Jewish physical appearance as being the ones likely intended to be depictions of Jews?
Last edited:
Caporegime
I'm saying we can't tell which is which. We can only assume but that would be based on prejudice. I'd agree 1 is probable but couldn't say on any of the others. However all of them are being cast in the same negative light.
Soldato
To me it's very clear what the mural is getting at and I find it incredibly bigoted and is the sort of thing you would expect to see if some Joseph Goebbels propaganda pamphlet circa 1930's/1940's. However Jeremy Corbyn's comments don't surprise me though, he made them in 2012 at a time when he didn't have the profile he has now and was certainly never expected to challenge for the leadership so properly felt he didn't need to be careful when expressing his true beliefs.
Soldato
Exactly, and it doesnt matter to the meaning of the image either. The six men could have been Japanese Businessmen, American pension fund leaders, Uk or American political leaders, the Dragons from Dragons Den, NHS trust leaders/consultants, or 6 clones of Sir Philip Green.
Thats what I see in my minds eye when i look at the image, not Jews. It is all about an individuals interpretation.
Ok so would you get a tattoo of a swastikas on you forehead? It's only a picture right?
Note: I'm not suggesting you're a Nazi, I'm trying to make a point.
What about wearing a T-shirt saying I **** children? Just words right?
:-/
Caporegime
You're making a point? That just looks like you're typing ********* to me!
I will provide a little to help thoose unsure or unaware of stereotypical, non religious, often used in a derogatory fashion, Jewish male caricatured features
Caporegime
So which of the bulbous nosed bald men fits those caricatures?
Well given that I suggest the mural does depict older men..... like I said numbers 1,3 and 6 (going left to right of the seated individuals) seem likely subjects as being more obvious ....
What with them having what looks to be much bigger noses then the other three (albeit 5 has a large nose compared to 2 and 4) and facial hair that's consistent with a more secular (I. E omitting long curly orthodox style hair or something similiar) depictions of older male Jewishness
Last edited:
Caporegime
You're reaching. Your links pointed out aquiline noses and lots of hair. None of the men in the mural have either of those things. Three have large noses which, as I said, are bulbous but definitely not aquiline! All of the men appear to have facial hair with all but one being balding.
I've got curly facial hair. Am I therefore a Jewish caricature?
Permabanned
So Damien Hurst's dead calf in formaldehyde, is that an affront to us carnivores? 
Or just more Tate Modern guff?
Or just more Tate Modern guff?
Permabanned
Soldato
Im aware of the Jewish stereotype, in the same way as Im aware of the Chinese stereotype, the American cooking on a BBQ, the French man on a bike with a string of onions round his neck etc etc.
The point remains that it what you see when you look at the image that matters. As an individual you will either be offended by it, or not and that is fine either way. What I take issue with is lobbying bodies jumping on these things to score political points.
Im no fan of Corbyn, but if he looked at the image and simply saw a depiction of slavery to capitalism then he saw what I saw, no Jews involved. The artist may well have intended them to be Jews but if that fact wasnt explicit then no one can blame anyone else for looking at it and not registering that fact themselves.
Last edited:
So the term 'just a picture' can be used only when it suits your point?
We will have to agree to disagree on the aquiline point as I think the males highlighted have both bulbous and aquiline noses
1, 3 and 6 are depicted as being hairy if sometimes bald(ing) men
In a certain context curly hair can be used to caricauture Jews but its not a unique feature and other groups caricatures can include curly hair so I can't help you Re the last bit
Long story short.
He changed his mind about something, how dare he? who does he think he is?
Or he felt compelled to issue a statement re a previous comment he had made about a mural because of an overblown controversy about it when he may have missed the implicit racial angle previously and instead just noted the apparent 'class' angle?
I don't think JC has changed his views on 'class struggle' that much in three years
Soldato
I'm living in hope that one day an apology speech will consist of:
"I'd like to address the recent unrest that has arisen following my previous support for a mural now deemed anti-Semitic. It's a ******* picture, get over it. Thank you all for coming."
"I'd like to address the recent unrest that has arisen following my previous support for a mural now deemed anti-Semitic. It's a ******* picture, get over it. Thank you all for coming."