Building : 11942


Building / 11942

Canceled Lego Theme...? —Daniel Siskind

I just can't seem to keep my mind on filling Bricklink orders today and started daydreaming... (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Apr-02, to lugnet.build)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Scott E. Sanburn

Dan & All, (...) Scott S. -- (22 years ago, 16-Apr-02, to lugnet.build)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Daniel Siskind

(...) Scott, I have to ask if you are suggesting that it's innapropriate to use Lego bricks for the expression of social-political satire? Or are you suggesting that any social-political commentary outside official USA doctrine to be as offensive (...) (22 years ago, 17-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Scott would have to speak for himself on what he meant (and he doesn't always read .debate so may miss this unless notified by email, and even then may choose not to respond at all)... but I did not take what he said as either of those things. (...) (22 years ago, 17-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Lawrence Wilkes

"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:Guq6vs.DKE@lugnet.com... (...) Lego bricks (...) that any (...) offensive (...) Lego(r) (...) of (...) inappropriate (...) picking a (...) they (...) satire. (...) a (...) as (...) (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Scott Arthur

(...) started (...) the (...) What am I missing here? What is the link between Dann's pic, Scott's comment & "official USA doctrine"? Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Scott E. Sanburn

Dan & All, It seems funny this goes right into debate, since I have not posted here for a variety of reasons in many moons. (...) Did I ever say that? No. All I said is that it your creation, along with the Holocaust Sets, seem to have the same (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Daniel Siskind

(...) I was wondering where you were making the connection between my image and the Holocaust set and you cleared it up perfectly well. Thanks! Most people who know me very well, know I like to build rather off the wall models and my subjects aren't (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Dave Schuler

(...) Now that I think of it, there's another interpretation of Scott's post that I don't believe has been considered. Maybe Scott's point can be paraphrased as "Wow. As commentary-in-LEGO, that ranks..." I absolutely don't presume to put words in (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) That's more or less what I was saying too. (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Scott Arthur

(...) I agree with this, but I think he meant it to be rather negative. For the record, I think Scott was not quite correct. In my opinion, the Holocaust sets can be considered to be "art", whereas I feel Dan's intention was a jest. Of course, it (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Scott E. Sanburn

Scott & All, (Ach, too many Scott's in here! : ) ) (...) Not really, as I have said before, they both have that shock value, regardless of the debate aspects of both subjects. I was shocked when I saw both, actually. (...) Well, there has been a lot (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —John Neal

(...) That is a result of your pre-conceived notions. You sympathize with PLO terrorists and so you feel it comes off negative. I abhor PLO terrorists and not coincidently, I found it amusing. In the same way, I find mockery in the Brick Testament. (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I certainly won't argue that point... at least not at this time. (...) but I would assert that there are at least two competing definitions of art: "art is in the eye of the beholder" "art is what the artist says is art" Under the first (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —John Neal

(...) This is a hot button issue for me, because I really dislike a definition of art to be "anything"-- it's useless IMO. (...) An artist can call the sky pink, but that doesn't make it so. More hot buttons:-) (...) I'd bet BPS wouldn't agree with (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Dave Schuler

(...) I disagree only because I don't see these as competing views! In my view, the artist is no more or less an observer than anyone else, when it comes to viewing/judging/interpreting the work. To that end, "art is what the artist says is art," (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Leonard Erlandson

(...) My favorite definition of art, as coined by Scott McCloud is: Art is that which is created not out of the basic need for survival. I like this definition because it is completely objective. I don't appreciate some art, but that doesn't mean (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Dave Schuler

(...) Easy there, fireball, lest we accuse you of being a Typical Conservative--santimoniousness, arrogance, bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, and an irrepressible zeal for curtailing others' rights to expression. Naturally I'd never want to paint a (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

What is Art..(again?) (was:Re: Canceled Lego Theme...?) —John Neal

(...) Guilt as charged-- I guess that one slipped out:-) (...) A hot button issue for me, as I stated elsewhere, and no time to delve into it now, but here is the short of it. I realize that a definition of art is elusive at best, but I am more (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: What is Art..(again?) (was:Re: Canceled Lego Theme...?) —Dave Schuler

(...) "Perverse" is an emotionalism in this context so should probably be avoided in a serious debate on the subject. However, when I was younger (goodness gracious--when I was *half* my current age!!!!) I had several friends taking something like (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —David Koudys

(...) Oh what was that quote from West Wing--Republicans being 'small-minded, xenophobic, anti-choice, gun worshipping...' oh I can't remember--going to have to watch a tape tonite! :) Yes, in *your* opinion, the holocaust set were not art. In *my* (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —John Neal

(...) Well, I don't watch TV much, so I wouldn't know... (...) So you are comfortable calling a image depicting child molestation art, merely because the slime who created it says it is? So what use is art, if it's anything and everything anyone (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —David Koudys

(...) Am *I* comfortable with it? Not at all. As stated, I didn't appreciate a red stripe on a black canvas. That was just a stripe! There is a bigger picture, and I think the history of my posts have said again and again--I have the freedom to do (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —David Koudys

(...) I can't believe that after all these years, i still do the \'s wrong at times :) (URL) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Warning! Dave Koudys is espousing Libertarian rhetoric in the above :-) (...) Just as a note, the US Supreme Court ruled on this very topic this week and for once, by 5 to 4, got it right. (they ruled that depictions of acts by adults in a way (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —John Neal

(...) Yeah, I thought he was from England;-) (...) Yes, leave it to the scum to circumvent law to appease their perversions. The slippery slope slants both ways. Our society will be hurt by this. -John (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Leonard Erlandson

(...) Have you read the proposed law? It was far to broad to enacted or objectively enforced. Any movie that portrayed high schoolers in adult situations, nothing graphic mind you, would be considered child pornography under this law. That is only a (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Dave Schuler

(...) There's that word again. And here's another anecdote from my storied history: While in college I met a 20-year-old woman with Turner's syndrome; she had only a single chromosome, she never developed secondary sexual characteristics, and she (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —John Neal

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: While in college I met a 20-year-old woman with Turner's syndrome; (...) Wow. Even amoebas have more than that, IIRC..... (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Dave Schuler

(...) Well, I did mention that she was short. Should have read "only a single X chromosome." In any case, you didn't address the salient point that under the too-broad law you seem to support, the woman's rights to expression would be curtailed (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —John Neal

(...) Sorry-- couldn't resist:-) (...) It is an interesting scenario. I am not for the government restricting the rights of adults so much as I am concerned about protecting minors from disgusting things adults like to do. Although she *is* free to (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —David Koudys

(...) Nicely said! The second someone's actions negatively impact on someone else, is where the line is drawn. If a person gets his kicks by reading dirty magazines, he has the freedom to do so. If he leaves the magazine laying around for kids to (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —David Koudys

(...) There's the Christian ideal, 'Hate the sin, not the sinner'. Name calling (a la 'scum') does not help in resolution of the problem. Quoting Pastor Doug Mckenzie " My topic today is bugs... Everyone hates bugs But why kill them, If everyone (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Dave Schuler

(...) Will you give the poor guy a break for his typo already? He obviously meant to type "crow paddies," which equally obviously refer to rice farms that have an abundance of crows feeding on them. Duh! Dave! (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Art? (Was: Re: Canceled Lego Theme...?) —David Eaton

(...) I think I'll try at a definition I can live with: Art is that which is created/performed/presented with the intent of invoking an emotional reaction from those to whom it is presented. Child porn - Art? Only if it's the intent of the (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Yet another one for Maggie!!! Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Dave Schuler

(...) Aaaagh! Here we were having a light-hearted debate and that evil linguistic device cropped up again. I tells ya, I don't get no respeck. Dave! (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Yet another one for Maggie!!! Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Which? Cow paddies? I don't even know that those are. I know what rice paddies are, though. (and they are not art, they're just farms.) (...) Stop the presses! (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Yet another one for Maggie!!! Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Ron Sedlmeyer

(...) Let's see.....I think the politically correct description is "Cow Dung" I take it you've never heard of cow pattie tossing contests. You pick them up and throw them AFTER they dry up! Kinda of like Frisbees (sp?). :) Ron (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Yet another one for Maggie!!! Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Um, those are patties. I went to da Tech, I've played cow pattie bingo. But in this case, I'm asking about paddies. There's a difference. Just ask Dave! He gave a perfectly good explanation. (well, ok, it wasn't perfect. In fact it wasn't even (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Yet another one for Maggie!!! Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —David Koudys

(...) See, I read allotta LUGNET :) roast beef cow! Dave -who appreciated the roast beef cow 'cause my last name is Koudys (pronounced cow-dice :) ) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —David Eaton

(...) Well, I gotta go with Scott on this one-- I definitely think the Holocaust sets were, and were intended to be, art. Controversial art certainly, but art nonetheless. I get the feeling from Dan that his work was intended to be silly, and not (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

jumping to conclusions —Scott Arthur

(...) I would love to see the cognitive process your mind went through to reach (jump to) that conclusion. Although I do support the right of self defence, I am fundamentally a pacifist in nature. I believe strongly that we should uphold human (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: jumping to conclusions —John Neal

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: These beliefs (...) Sorry, there isn't one. The PLO represent the Palestinians. Whatever the PLO does, the Palestinians support them. Anyone who supports the actions of terrorists is just as culpable (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)