Occupy Calgary/Do Not Merge

[Bownesian]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

The act of protesting was never disallowed, nor were the occupyer's silenced.

They were free to congregate in the park, or march in front of city hall, or whatever, the city didn't ever take away those rights.

The Occupyer's can cry and complain all they want, but they're being dishonest about their rights being taken away.

they never had the right to camp in the park.

I agree with you on all these counts and more I'm sure.

The protester's message was poorly delivered, unfocused and often inane but they chose non-violent civil disobedience and paid the price in confiscated property and ultimately in fines. I am also on your side in wishing that things moved a little faster but I understand the City being patient and letting the protest run its course rather than running in with riot shields on the first night, which may have cost more in the long run.

I just don't see the point of destroying a work of art in a city that has lots of room to display it (and that does display sculptures West of downtown on the south side of the river among other places). It's a visually compelling, meaningful piece and representative of a historical event and a certain point of view. Whether we disagree with the message or not, there is nothing to be gained by throwing the art away as long as it can be displayed safely somewhere.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Robbob

As much as they complained about their freedom of speech and right for assembly. The city had no problem with them going down to OP every day to protest. What they didn't want is peopel camping. IMO spending the night or sleeping doesn't really go towards your freedom of speech as 1) you aren't saying anything 2) there isn't anyone around.

Have these guys even shown up again since to continue their "protest"/promote their cause(s) whatever they are?

Once they could no longer camp there, it appears that their cause died. Seems like their cause was just to camp out/damage public property. Otherwise they'd still be devoted to showing up every day.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Have these guys even shown up again since to continue their "protest"/promote their cause(s) whatever they are?

Once they could no longer camp there, it appears that their cause died. Seems like their cause was just to camp out/damage public property. Otherwise they'd still be devoted to showing up every day.

Nope, the parks been empty, even their social media presence on Twitter pretty much dried up.

The whole thing became a fraud when OWS declared a day of action, and nothing happened here.

My problem with the statue isn't the statue itself, which someone apparently put a lot of work into. But the explanation that this somehow represented the protestors being silenced, and being left in the park as a middle finger to the city.

Everyone who knows me on this board knows that I sometimes take a bit of an exagerated hard line on things.

When I said that the statue should be melted into knight rider lunch boxes by Matel it was a toungue in cheek comment about using the statue to feed the hungry steel foundries of a faceless multinational conglomerate. I thought it was funny myself, of course our local occupyer flew off the handle.

Earler when I said that the statue should be allowed to or encourage to decay in 55 days and photographed, is that not art? Especially when the interpretation would be the depiction of the Occupy Calgary movement and in inability to deliver a coheisve message.

However, while I took offense to the redneck nazi stuff, I did question our occupyers ascertation that all art is sacred. While I believe that art is important and vital and creates discussion, not all art is sacred. Dog's playing poker for example is a direct illustration of that.

And I think that a art concept based on dishonesty is not sacred, its a discussion point but its not sacred, and in a lot of ways I feel that the message they tried to convey with Heart of the Beast is dishonest and wholly political.

Cynical yes, Sacred no

[Regular_John]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Have these guys even shown up again since to continue their "protest"/promote their cause(s) whatever they are?

Once they could no longer camp there, it appears that their cause died. Seems like their cause was just to camp out/damage public property. Otherwise they'd still be devoted to showing up every day.

Nope, they decided whole heartedly inaccurate statement of "we've been silenced" is there last word. Aside from that it's been "the sculpture is for the people! not the city!".

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

Call me an elitist, but I don't see having 15 homeless people staying in my house as an easy way to make $4500.

Apparently his landlord didn't like it much either. They are all being evicted.

http://www.metronews.ca/calgary/loca...vict-occupiers

[CaptainCrunch]

Occupy the Highschool Senior parking lot

http://www.cracked.com/blog/occupy-h...lot-manifesto/

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Apparently his landlord didn't like it much either. They are all being evicted.

http://www.metronews.ca/calgary/loca...vict-occupiers

good for the land lord.

[Madman]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Apparently his landlord didn't like it much either. They are all being evicted.

http://www.metronews.ca/calgary/loca...vict-occupiers

What did genius Hughes think was going to happen?

"Hey, I'm on the front page of a paper advertising that I'm a for-profit homeless shelter! Praise me!"

[TorqueDog]

I'm surprised he would do that in his rented home and think he'd get away with it. If I was a landlord, the second I got wind of that sort of activity, he'd have had the eviction notice in hand.

If you own the home, great, you're responsible for it. But a rental, come on.

[CaptainCrunch]

Cue the angry Occupyers complaining that the Landlord is an evil 1%er holding the man down.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

I just don't see the point of destroying a work of art in a city that has lots of room to display it (and that does display sculptures West of downtown on the south side of the river among other places). It's a visually compelling, meaningful piece and representative of a historical event and a certain point of view. Whether we disagree with the message or not, there is nothing to be gained by throwing the art away as long as it can be displayed safely somewhere.

I see a point of destroying it, I am 100% with captain on turning it into Knight Rider lunch box collector re-issues. Many artists would do anything to have a piece of their art on permanent public display. All this says, is you can put together any piece of trash, and dump it wherever the hell you want, because you think it is art. It sets a bad precedent, that would undoubtedly exploited.

And on the occupy movement being "Historic". It will go down in history as being one of the most laughable failures at public protest in modern history. It will be a late night monologue punchline for years to come.

[REDVAN]

I'll bet the "art" isn't even inside anywhere- and is decaying as we speak in some big gravel lot outdoors.

In a months time, the city will make a press release: we can't display the art because it has fully disintegrated. The artist, the occupy "movement", the city, and the rest of it's citizens all win.

HOWEVER, I also think it'd be fricken hilarious if they preserved the art so it would never decay, totally destroying the hippie artist's intent. Struck down by the man, once again.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

I'll bet the "art" isn't even inside anywhere- and is decaying as we speak in some big gravel lot outdoors.

In a months time, the city will make a press release: we can't display the art because it has fully disintegrated. The artist, the occupy "movement", the city, and the rest of it's citizens all win.

HOWEVER, I also think it'd be fricken hilarious if they preserved the art so it would never decay, totally destroying the hippie artist's intent. Struck down by the man, once again.

That is diabolically genius.

If the city will allow it, I will pay for the chemicals to rustproof it, and I will paint it with 10 coats of clear coat myself. Then I will sell it to Suncor Energy, and imbed it in the concrete in front of their building. All the profits will be used to pay Rene Borque's recent suspension fine. And anything left over, I use to get my BMW cut polished with the carcass of a baby seal.

[Cowperson]

Occupy costs to taxpayers in Vancouver now at $1 million.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/travel/...427/story.html

Cowperson

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

Even though I don't agree entirely with the occupiers' motives or method, I hope that the City does find a safe place for this statue to be displayed and rot away as the artist intended. It really is a stunning piece and is significant in its association with a protest that at a minimum succeeded in getting people talking about an issue that concerns many people.

Recycling it or storing it in some warehouse because of its political message would be a shame and not reflective of our pluralistic liberal democracy.

It's a pretty cool sculpture, but, really, the artist was working on this for three years - two and a half years before Occupy even existed. It'd be one thing if he or she was emotionally moved by the Occupy spirit and thusly embodied that in this sculpture.

Instead, it comes off more like: "Well, I have this big swirly metal sculpture in my backyard I've been wondering what to do with. How 'bout we come up with a cool, provocative name and backstory and dump it off in OP?"

I think a new name and a plaque would have been more successful: "Giant Coils: Putting the 'Squat' Into 'Squatters'"

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by zuluking

I think a new name and a plaque would have been more successful: "Giant Coils: Putting the 'Squat' Into 'Squatters'"

Sounds like it should be painted blue and gold, and donated to Edmonton.

[Gobsgraham]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Occupy the Highschool Senior parking lot

http://www.cracked.com/blog/occupy-h...lot-manifesto/

That article was hilarious. Reputation points for you sir.

[chemgear]

Apparently whatever cause they have isn't important enough for them to protest (in a legal fashion) while it's cold outside/inconvenient:


http://www.metronews.ca/calgary/loca...occupy-round-2

“When we see other cities doing their occupations, which I suspect will be in the spring, that’s when we will likely return,” Tavis Ford said Monday.

Ford admitted that repitching tents may push the group’s luck, but said maintaining a 24-hour presence will be vital at the new Occupy camp.

[grizz29]

Yawn. Their 15 minutes are over.

[Knut]

I say next time we release some wild bears in the area so they can get a true camping experience.