Since when is a statue of a nude woman -- that happens to be obese -- considered pornographic, inappropriate, and a threat to society? I guess since a battle over that very thing broke out in the crazy state of Arizona.
A contractor named Bill Tonnesen told local television news station KNXV that the sculpture was supposed to resemble an ancient artwork known as the Venus of Willendorf. But neighbors are opposed to the statue, which they say is an affront to the church and pre-school within viewing distance. One of his neighbors tried to explain that "the placement of it makes it an issue." Apparently, having it in such an "open viewing space" is of concern.
Oh dear ...
Tonnesen says the city actually doesn't have a problem with the statue at all, but his wife does. She's made him cover it up with a sheet for the time being. She's reportedly a member of the church nearby and isn't happy with it at all.
Honestly, I wouldn't want her sitting on my front yard, but that's only because this kind of art really isn't my cup of tea. But it certainly irritates me that Tonnesen is getting so much grief for his love of it.
Because, think about it ... If the statue was svelte, would it even be an issue at all? How many nude statues of women are all over people's front lawns? The always popular Venus de Milo is showing more than this statue! And yet, this is a problem? I get the feeling the people of Tempe should own up to what this is really about ... They'd be perfectly comfortable with nudity if it was a thin female statue. But the fact that she's nude and obese, well, that's intolerable!
Obviously, this controversy is more about what the neighbors are personally uncomfortable with versus something that's inappropriate. And sadly, if the contractor's wife is so opposed, the fate of the statue looks pretty dim.
Do you find this statue offensive?
Image via abc15.com