How do you get something back once it is on the Internet?

{Apologise this turned in to a bit of a rant.  I did not realise I was this annoyed/angry/disappointed until I started putting some thoughts down… not parent or child related in any way I am afraid.}

I have been listening to Cape Talk through all the discussion about “The Spear” – and for some reason, and it may just be poor timing on my part, when ever I am in the car listening and there is a person from the “ruling party” talking about this artwork and what they think should be done with it – they always sound a bit, well demented and unhinged – and seem unable to present an opinion without somehow making it a racial issue or a flash back to Apartheid.

{But I may have only heard a few interviews, and maybe there were more sensible ones that I did not hear … maybe.}

Earlier today I heard a sound bite from an interview and this woman was explaining {I am using this word generously, what I actually want to say is she was ranting like a demented lunatic} that the painting should not go to “this some German people” and that this is “all like apartheid…”

I have no idea how this painting has turned in to the lunatic asylum that it has turned into.  I am really not wanting to get into a huge political debate and stand and defend or demonise a piece of canvas.  Really I do not, I am just having a wee vent here in my corner of the blogosphere.

I have been known to vote for the ANC, so  I am not violently opposed to them.  This is not about which political party I support.

The part I am unclear on in this entire frucus, is if the painting is sold, and no longer on display, and is going to be taken out of the country, and is defaced and you are no longer allowed to see what was considered “pornographic” then what is the fuss about?  It’s art.  Not everyone agrees it is great.  Not everyone is meant to like it.  But someone bought it.  It is no longer owned locally, or on display.

It is done, and over, but people are still foaming at the mouth.

Is the president now “that guy” who we cannot poke fun at or make political or social comments about – either in print, media or art?  Has he become that reverred a fellow?

Can the “ruling party” really stop someone portraying the president in an unsavoury manner?

In that case, maybe he should stop acting in an unsavoury manner …. I don’t see anyone depicting Mandela or even Julius with his member exposed.  I wonder why not?

So why does JZ get to have his trouser snake on display in such a manner??  Something about the shoe and fitting I suppose.

The part that I am REALLY  confused about, is the furor around removing this image from the Goodman Gallery’s website.  Okay so they do that, so what!  Then what?

Anyone who has google will be able to access this image – and 1.8 million similar ones – so why exactly is pressure being applied to the Gallery?  And clearly the message is, art is fine as long it does not taint our honoured leaders,a nd offend the “ruling party.”  (I am getting a Zimbabwe feel about this entire thing ….)

I personally did not think it was an offensive piece of art.  I have seen other images that offended me more.  I have seen Axe deodorant commercials that offend me more.

Jacob has been portrayed as this poor innocent soul who has had his reputation tarnished.  Whose wives and children are horrified as they have been exposed to his member, in public.

Caution me if I am incorrect, but JZ does not exactly strike me as a guy who is not a bit shall we say liberal with disrobing before concubines and daughters of his friends.

I must say, when he was on trial for rape, I sort of lost a bit of respect for him.

When he got off on that trial, which really was a bit “justice blind” and he had the entire AIDS/Shower fiasco, well I sort of lost a bit more respect.

When it was clear he slept with someone who it appears he “took advantage of” well then I lost a bit more  respect for him.

When Julius made his infamous statement about a raped woman not having breakfast and waiting on taxi fare, and the president’s camp remaining quiet and not immediately slapping Julius silly … well then I lost a bit of respect for him.

When he impregnated his friend’s daughter, well that sort of made me lose a bit more respect for him.

When he married for the umpteenth time, when our country really needs a different kind of role model, I lost a bit more respect for him.

When it turned out the woman he was marrying had an 11-year-old child from him, meaning he had cheated on his then wife(s), to impregnate her sort of made me lose a bit of respect for him.  All of this while he was explaining the concept of plural marriages and how it is good for families and I assume does not make husbands step out of their marriage, he was clearly shopping around a bit.

I really am not sure how many bits of respect I have left for him at the moment.

{Please bear in mind that I tend to think the “best” of people until they absolutely fk it up …. really up until that point I reserve judgement.  I believed Hansie was innocent until, well, it was impossible to believe it any more.  I stood up for him.  I even felt bad for Joost and his underpants debacle, and thought, well he must be innocent, because he says he is ……}

I do tend to take the high road and believe innocence, but wow Jacob has made it a bit difficult for me.

This painting barely pipped on my radar, until there was so much screaming, hair pulling and shirt wrenching, that I could not “not” pay attention to it.

The painting did little in the way of make me think “less” of our president, but definitely made me think “less” of the party he represents who used intimidation and other means to ensure this painting was pulled and that City Press issue an apology (of sorts.)  I can’t imagine that this was done without his consent or knowledge …..

Do I think a in a painting is offensive?

Well that would depend on the comment the painting was making.

Does anyone else get a bit of a George Orwell feeling here in reference to the “Animal Farm” and how the pigs who have taken control of the farm, are doing the same things that the farmer used to do before??

I assume everyone got the Lenin reference … not exactly subtle ….. if not then here it is, just in case you had not made the connection.  Considering the “history” of Lenin one would think that JZ would be a bit more offended by that reference, but it appears not.

My original point, which I appear to have got a bit side-tracked from is how is the “ruling party” going to remove all 1 million 8 hundred thousand images that are on the web?

Does fighting with the Goodman Gallery to take it off their site really matter at this point?  I mean really?

In closing …. the fact that the “ruling party” has seen fit to spend more money and time on this ridiculous “spear painting” cause whilst they have seen it fit to NOT to fund and expend the same amount of energy on ensuring that  the Sarah Baartman Centre  {which supports abused women and children} remains open, as it serves an especially needy sector of our community.

The Centre was forced to announce it had insufficient funding and was due for closure.  Eventually there was public support and it has a lifeline to continue doing good work. The government in the interim is a bit busy seeing to one

A centre like this is under threat of closure.  Only 45% of school children receive text books.  Every minute 6 600 child p.orn.ogra.phic images are downloaded in this country.  There are police stations without police vans or police officers qualified to drive them.  There are 9 year old girls at school, pregnant.

But instead of dealing with some of these issues, our mighty leaders and policy makers, and unions, are expending time and energy, on whether there is an acrylic p.e.nis on a canvas.  Sold.  On it’s way to Germany.

Well that disappoints me more than 1000 picture of the president with his p.eni.s exposed.