Hus of Horrors

[getafix]

Thanks to ssassi for this one 

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/7903/pic05e.jpg

 

wow..how sexy

G

[abs]

OK, this must be the place for this. Normally I just post the photos directly, but I´ll make an exception this time. The reason is that this painting might be very offensive to some viewers. It is very sexual in centent, so be warned.

http://i2-images4.tv2net....0b0254083f36e7df2b10.jpeg

[Chris]

What's the point of this picture?  It appears to have been made simply to degrade and embarrass its subjects.  It shows very little intelligent imagination and has no entertainment value.  IMO it speaks volumes about the people who created it rather than the people it depicts.  Abs, I usually enjoy your posts but I think we might have reached an all-time low with this one.

[Maria]

Since abs posted a warning about the link, I don't see the problem. The picture is part of the debate about the DRF in Denmark and as such relevant even if it might be vile.

[Chris]

You make the rules.  However, I respectfully disagree with your comments. 

[Maria]

I can't make everyone happy. No one is forcing you to be here.

[Shalex]

I agree with Chris on this one.
You are correct Maria in that we do not have to be here if we don't want to.  But I don't expect to see porn here.  If I wanted to see porn  then I would go to a porn site.

[Miss Waynfleet]

Ehm, this pic was posted months ago if I remember correctly and people discussed it normal 

[jusaca]

The picture is representing the perceived value system of the DRF.  I agree that it is confrontational, but it displays nothing more than wanton and promiscuous pleasure-seeking.  There is no truly offensive activity in it.

One can argue that the DRF pursues pleasure-seeking at the expense of its position and the Danish tax payer.  Frankly I find Mary's uncontrolled pursuit of clothes, shoes, hats, beauty treatments, handbags, jewellery, different hairstyles, etc, deeply offensive - more offensive than a carnal painting.  Add her material pursuits to the way she hunts the camera with her eyes, and you have a perfect subject for a provocative sexual lampoon. 

It is Mary mostly who has brought the family to this type of imagery.    Disappointing , but the DRF don't care to control her so they can wear it.

[freethespoon]

If you look at it on face value only, yes, it is kinda offensive.  Well, to me it is, anyway.

But go beyond the face value and it's saying something fairly relevant about the DRF.  That it just doesn't give a sh*t.  Decency and dedication to the people who pay for it to survive is eschewed in favour of self-satisfaction. 

The acts portrayed are beyond 'common' decency and the message that represents is that the DRF doesn't care.  It will go past common decency to satisfy its own needs.  Pretty cogent.

Pornographic on the surface yes.  A stinging slap in the face to the most selfish house in Europe - to me, the stronger message.

[fairy]

I think Fts is right with her analysis.
And I would like to add, that I find it quite telling that a painting like that actually makes it to the light.
Of course there have always been caricatures or cartoons of the royal families everywhere in Europe.
But you can tell from the way the cartoon is done, where the level of respect, tolerance and acceptance of the depicted royal is.
The less the royal (politician or celeb) is loved or respected by the majority of the people, the more vicious the portraits, the more it shows socially unaccepted acts or even taboos. (like kicking a kitten vs eating a baby)
The cartoon above is pretty graphic, leaves noone out, touches several social taboos not only sex and wasn't angrily rejected, but perhaps only mildly critizised as a "bit over the top".
Quite telling.....

[abs]

Ehm, this pic was posted months ago if I remember correctly and people discussed it normal 

Wasn´t it the picture below that was discussed?

I was very doubtful as to whether posting it or not. I saw it on a Danish art programme on TV yesterday - so it is considered art. I put up a warning, and thanks Maria, for finding that in order. People don´t have to look at it - I did say that it could be offensive and that it was sexual in content.
There is a little bit of controversy about it, because it was supposed to have been exhibited at one point, but the exhibition was simply closed down because of that picture. The group of artists who were to exhibit their works called cencorship. The picture was exhibited later though.
Here is a little bit about that (Google translate)

From "Det sker Ibyen"

The controversial poster, depicting the royal family in a sexorgie now appear for the first time in Denmark.

 The artist group Surrend behind the controversial poster, showing members of the Danish royal family unfold in various sexual acts.

 From this Thursday the utility can be seen in connection with the Aarhus Comedy Festival.

 "We are pleased that the poster is displayed in an interesting context in which the very boundaries of art and satire are put on the agenda," said Jan Egesborg from Surrend.

 The poster has previously been responsible for the Old Town in Aarhus canceled an entire show from wreaking group Surrend.

 READ Article Royal group sex was too much for the Old City

 But Aarhus Comedy Festival can not be intimidated.

 "Borders can be crossed, drawn, searched, torn down, prevented and investigated. That is what is the artistic challenge for this year's festival. Therefore we are pleased to announce Surrends boundaries poster, "said festival director Tommy Nielsen.

 Has been abroad
 The royal poster to 13th October last year have been part of a retrospective exhibition at the Danish Poster Museum, located in the Old Town in Aarhus.

 But the poster controversial content led to concerns among the Old Town's management, and Surrendering agreed to withdraw from the exhibition. It took the museum, however, that it may appear elsewhere.

 Yet published Surrend poster that can be seen in several places on the net, and therefore decided the Old City to cancel the entire exhibition.

 The poster has since been exhibited abroad - by Berlin, but now appears for the first time in Denmark.

[abs]

P.S. some good analysis from jusaca, freethespoon and fairy!  and one for Maria   

[Little_star]

Good posts fairy, jusaca and FTS 

[Stefanie]

The picture is representing the perceived value system of the DRF.  I agree that it is confrontational, but it displays nothing more than wanton and promiscuous pleasure-seeking.  There is no truly offensive activity in it.

One can argue that the DRF pursues pleasure-seeking at the expense of its position and the Danish tax payer.  Frankly I find Mary's uncontrolled pursuit of clothes, shoes, hats, beauty treatments, handbags, jewellery, different hairstyles, etc, deeply offensive - more offensive than a carnal painting.  Add her material pursuits to the way she hunts the camera with her eyes, and you have a perfect subject for a provocative sexual lampoon. 

It is Mary mostly who has brought the family to this type of imagery.    Disappointing , but the DRF don't care to control her so they can wear it.

Very well put, jusaca 
The real obscene behaviour does not only and always lie in sexual acts. E.g. I find Mary´s attitude and behaviour during her stay in Africa much more obscene than the picture abs has posted.