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

    • Sue
      Taxes

      By Sue · Posted

      Whilst I agree to some extent,  are they going to have some kind of checkpoint?  I can't see how this could work in practice. Surely Southwark residents go to these places quite frequently as well, particularly Tate Modern?  Will we have to take proof of residency every time we go out? What happens when family are with us who don't live in Southwark? Will other London boroughs start doing the same thing? Will Southwark residents be charged a tourist tax to visit "tourist attractions" in other areas, eg the V&A and the British Museum?
    • JessicaCT
      Plumber recommendation – Mark at Pure Plumbers

      By JessicaCT · Posted

      A shout out for Mark, owner of Pure Plumbers. 07970 971510 They're well established in the Sevenoaks area, but have recently started doing more work in SE London.  Did some v quick and efficient bathroom and boiler fixes for me; have also seen some of the bathrooms he's built, which have a nice attention to detail. Jessica    
    • beansprout
      New Empanada Place on LL

      By beansprout · Posted

      Totally agree regarding not supporting chains. Gail’s was fine but last time I went in Feb this year, actually walked out Fayetteville looking at menu and waiting 15 minutes to even get glass of water and not busy at all. Staff gone down hill - sooner it goes the better… Always prefer to support non chains - so many lovely places with good food to choose from with pleasant staff who know about customer service and sadly, non English which says a lot for our culture, pubs are also becoming abit of a hit and miss affair but maybe just unlucky. At the end of the day all about the chef. Still abit unclear where new place is located - is it down the road from Goose Green where parade of shops are before Peckham Rye?  
    • Penguin68
      New Empanada Place on LL

      By Penguin68 · Posted

      Surely only where the local businesses offer clear advantages, otherwise you are rewarding what should be failure. I want to be served by a better bakery than Gail's, not a worse but local independent one. Certainly give a local independent some time to get the offer right, but don't buy goods which are worse and or more expensive just because the outlet isn't a chain. 

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...