|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 25, 2014 15:42:46 GMT -5
 Since the monks were going to destroy their work anyway, the kid was simply completing their task. "And a little child shall lead them." What better way to symbolize the fleeting nature of life than to have your own demonstration of that destroyed before you can do it. Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on Apr 25, 2014 17:03:17 GMT -5
Yes, but where does that destructive streak come from?
I built a sand sculpture at the seaside once, years ago - a kind of reworking of The Sphinx - and a crowd gathered round to watch. (If I say it was quite good Lily will accuse me of having an inflated ego, so let's just say Michelangelo wouldn't have been embarrassed to have sculpted it : )) As soon as I finished and stood up - I mean in less than a second - a couple of kids jumped on it and destroyed it. It didn't particularly bother me that it was destroyed, since the tide was coming in and it would have been washed away anyway, but it did and does bother me that humans seem to have an innate compulsion to destroy things. In the same vein, there are people who derive great pleasure from destroying parked bicycles, keying cars etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 17:33:17 GMT -5
I'm glad you posted that, Zak. It bothers me that Bob thinks that was funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 25, 2014 17:58:15 GMT -5
Yes, but where does that destructive streak come from? I built a sand sculpture at the seaside once, years ago - a kind of reworking of The Sphinx - and a crowd gathered round to watch. (If I say it was quite good Lily will accuse me of having an inflated ego, so let's just say Michelangelo wouldn't have been embarrassed to have sculpted it : )) As soon as I finished and stood up - I mean in less than a second - a couple of kids jumped on it and destroyed it. It didn't particularly bother me that it was destroyed, since the tide was coming in and it would have been washed away anyway, but it did and does bother me that humans seem to have an innate compulsion to destroy things. In the same vein, there are people who derive great pleasure from destroying parked bicycles, keying cars etc. I'm sorry about your sculpture Zak, but this case is different. This was a young boy who just climbed into the exhibit. Most likely he did not want to purposely want to destroy anything. You did your sculpture for fun. These monks did their so that it could be purposely destroyed so they could demonstrate the fleetingness of life. That little kid did it for them. Bob |
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 25, 2014 18:00:21 GMT -5
I'm glad you posted that, Zak. It bothers me that Bob thinks that was funny. If it were a regular work of art, it would not be funny. Under the circumstances though, what did the monks have to complain about? The child's action demonstrated what they wanted to be demonstrated. The fleetingness of life. Bob |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 18:05:40 GMT -5
I'm glad you posted that, Zak. It bothers me that Bob thinks that was funny. If it were a regular work of art, it would not be funny. Under the circumstances though, what did the monks have to complain about? The child's action demonstrated what they wanted to be demonstrated. The fleetingness of life. Bob Well, guess what, Bob? All life is fleeting, so why don't you just end it now, huh? No big deal, right? Too many times you just don't think things through very well. |
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 25, 2014 18:29:10 GMT -5
If it were a regular work of art, it would not be funny. Under the circumstances though, what did the monks have to complain about? The child's action demonstrated what they wanted to be demonstrated. The fleetingness of life. Bob Well, guess what, Bob? All life is fleeting, so why don't you just end it now, huh? No big deal, right? Too many times you just don't think things through very well. But Lily, I didn't say that life was fleeting. Those monks did. Tell them that they didn't think things through very well. Bob |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 18:30:21 GMT -5
And furthermore, Bob. The child did not demonstrate the fleetingness of life. He demonstrated irresponsble parents and a bratty kid. Much like most kids are like today. And that's NOT funny, no matter what you think of the "art work".
|
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on Apr 25, 2014 18:32:17 GMT -5
Just to be clear, I wasn't making a comparison between my stupid sand sculpture and the monks' sand mandala. I was merely drawing attention to what seems to be an innate destructive impulse in human (notwithstanding the fact that the child in this case didn't deliberately destroy the sand mandala).
|
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Apr 25, 2014 19:10:00 GMT -5
Actually -- the headline uses the word "tot" -- so I imagine we're talking about a toddler. Seriously, I doubt a two year old (or thereabouts) is embarking on "destructiveness with purpose".
The sand is pretty colored -- I imagine he/she just wanted to touch it -- that's pretty common at that age and how they learn. I doubt the monks are upset about it because a "tot" hasn't reached the age of reason.
--Debutante
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 19:12:46 GMT -5
Well, presumably the parents have reached the age of reason. Or maybe not....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 19:23:29 GMT -5
This from the link in Bob's post:
So, Bob did have a point, although he thought he was making a funny. The monks were being monks and philosophical. It appears that the parents were becoming U.S. citizens and were too busy to watch the child, or whoever was supposed to.
Oh, and the child didn't just touch it. He jumped right into the middle of it. Brat.
|
|
Since the monks were going to destroy their work anyway, the kid was simply completing their task. "And a little child shall lead them."
