Jump to content

Mural in North Cross Road?

nxjen

By nxjen
in General ED Issues / Gossip

 Share

Recommended Posts

Bony Fido

Bony Fido

Posted
Posted
I hope they don't make the same mistake as did those who produced the mural on the side of what is now the Lordship Pub and Kitchen - they used a really big cherry-picker that was so heavy it seriously damaged the pavement - must have been fairly costly to repair...
i*Rate

i*Rate

Posted
Posted

Bony Fido,


The mistake with the mural on the Lordship pub that Sue commented on has nothing to do with a Cherry Picker, I think that it might be about the artist's reputation from past works!?

Nice to see a mural that not pompously based on classical paintings in Dulwich Picture Gallery - be good to have something referencing 20th Century art for a change.


R. Mutt.

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

i*Rate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bony Fido,

>

> The mistake with the mural on the Lordship pub

> that Sue commented on has nothing to do with a

> Cherry Picker, I think that it might be about the

> artist's reputation from past works!?

> Nice to see a mural that not pompously based on

> classical paintings in Dulwich Picture Gallery -

> be good to have something referencing 20th Century

> art for a change.

>

> R. Mutt.



I don't know anything about that artist's reputation or past works, I just really dislike that mural. I think the unlamented and short-lived Patch might have commissioned it?


Surely the whole point of many of the local murals are that they are based on pictures from Dulwich Picture Gallery? Because - we are in Dulwich! I think that was a brilliant idea. They are so varied, too.


I don't see why you would describe them as "pompous"?

Bony Fido

Bony Fido

Posted
Posted

i*Rate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bony Fido,

>

> The mistake with the mural on the Lordship pub

> that Sue commented on has nothing to do with a

> Cherry Picker, I think that it might be about the

> artist's reputation from past works!?

> Nice to see a mural that not pompously based on

> classical paintings in Dulwich Picture Gallery -

> be good to have something referencing 20th Century

> art for a change.

>

> R. Mutt.


I have no claim to being an art critic!! The mistake to which I was referring has nothing to do with the actual mural - it was about the fact that the pavement was damaged by the weight of the cherrypicker.

Seabag

Seabag

Posted
Posted

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Great! I love (most of) our ED murals.

>

> Except the one on the side of what is now The

> Lordship ......


But NOT that ?love is a prison? one by The Artless Dodger


Please tell me he?s gone on to work in an estate agent, or something.


His work is absolute cark.

i*Rate

i*Rate

Posted
Posted

Lynne,


Good for you- well said, you are obviously someone that keeps up with what's going on it London! And good luck to The Artful Dodger, he's local and has been producing street art for many years!


As for Dulwich Picture Gallery and all it's works, well it's a great place, but that's Dulwich Village not East Dulwich; we are supposed to have our own identity here. We still have the local historical mural on Goose Green about William Blake, though, more like these maybe?


I rest my case.

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

i*Rate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lynne,

>

> Good for you- well said, you are obviously someone

> that keeps up with what's going on it London! And

> good luck to The Artful Dodger, he's local and has

> been producing street art for many years!

>

> As for Dulwich Picture Gallery and all it's works,

> well it's a great place, but that's Dulwich

> Village not East Dulwich; we are supposed to have

> our own identity here. We still have the local

> historical mural on Goose Green about William

> Blake, though, more like these maybe?

>

> I rest my case.



Sadly, it's not a very good case :))

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

alice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Could anyone clarify why mural by lordship is

> horrible. I had thought I liked it.



It's a matter of personal taste.


I don't think anybody is saying the mural is objectively horrible (which would be an odd thing to say). They are just saying that they personally don't like it.


If you thought you liked it, you probably still do. Don't be swayed by what other people think about it!

Lemming

Lemming

Posted
Posted

alice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Could anyone clarify why mural by lordship is

> horrible. I had thought I liked it.


Let me explain - as clearly you lack the required 'eye' to appraise this catastrophic occurrence.


Previously we had a large, featureless wall - composed with unpleasant beige bricks which were fired sixty years too late to be in keeping with 90% of the houses in the area - exuding all the charm of a soviet era social housing block.


This wall was clearly a much-loved asset to the community.


That someone could have the SHEER CHEEK to apply paint OF ANY SORT to this icon of mid-century design is BEYOND BELIEF.


I haven't seen it yet, but personally I hope it's a giant cock and balls - which would definitely be in keeping with at least some portions of the locality.

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

Lemming Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> alice Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Could anyone clarify why mural by lordship is

> > horrible. I had thought I liked it.

>

> Let me explain - as clearly you lack the required

> 'eye' to appraise this catastrophic occurrence.

>

> Previously we had a large, featureless wall -

> composed with unpleasant beige bricks which were

> fired sixty years too late to be in keeping with

> 90% of the houses in the area - exuding all the

> charm of a soviet era social housing block.

>

> This wall was clearly a much-loved asset to the

> community.

>

> That someone could have the SHEER CHEEK to apply

> paint OF ANY SORT to this icon of mid-century

> design is BEYOND BELIEF.

>

> I haven't seen it yet, but personally I hope it's

> a giant cock and balls - which would definitely be

> in keeping with at least some portions of the

> locality.



I think you are confusing two murals ....


The one on the side of The Lordship has been there for some years.

Lemming

Lemming

Posted
Posted

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> I think you are confusing two murals ....

>

> The one on the side of The Lordship has been there

> for some years.



You're absolutely right! I blame red wine - and hereby withdraw my comment about cocks and balls.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • Sephiroth
      Is Peter Mandelson toast

      By Sephiroth · Posted

      Both notoriously “lovely” people to spend any time with or worse, serve 
    • Jules-and-Boo
      Police appeal: Monday, 25 August – Assault between the junction of Lordship Lane and Chesterfield Grove at around 16:45hrs

      By Jules-and-Boo · Posted

      No, just no.  Zero tolerance does not mean we expect zero crime but that we do not accept a standard level as normal and unavoidable. For those who have suffered such “minor” crimes, myself included having had my house broken into,  it is clear from the lack of action that they are considered “acceptable”’. Once small crimes become known to be ignored, it changes where and how we live.     
    • malumbu
      Is Peter Mandelson toast

      By malumbu · Posted

      Lloyd Weber and Cilla Black were supposed to leave when Blair got in, but didn't
    • malumbu
      Police appeal: Monday, 25 August – Assault between the junction of Lordship Lane and Chesterfield Grove at around 16:45hrs

      By malumbu · Posted

      You can't have zero tolerance unless you live in a fascist/police state.  Sadly it is something you have to accept in a democracy.  There has always been crime, even in North Korea, the Soviet bloc, Nazi Germany, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge etc.   The discussion point is how big a police force we need and capabilities, punishment, and building communities.  And how much we are prepared to pay in extra taxation. Even in the good (economic) times there is crime.  And crime under both Labour and Tory governments. I do not accept that phone thefts and parcel thefts are just statistics.  Police have to prioritise what they do, we might not agree with it.  And most criminals are multi-tasking, moving to where the best return is considering the risk of being caught. And there has to be a market, someone somewhere needs to buy a stolen product (I never buy off Gumtree). A starting point would be to decriminalise all illegal drugs, but that is definitely for a separate Lounge conversation, interesting discussion paper here: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/105520/1/A. Stevens - In defence of the decriminalisation of drug possession in the uk - PPDF.pdf Did you watch any of the series of Peaky Blinders?  This was a very popular series that glorified gang crime and violence.  Funny (ironic) that may enjoy films and TV that does this.  Although only the first series had any historical accuracy in it,  Criminal gangs were around before and ever since.    

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...