Once again … this passes for art.
Prince Henry dead, really? No, this is just the latest in what some call art. Most just call it in poor taste and offensive. The artist, Daniel Edwards claims its a “war memorial dedicated to the brave at heart.”
Edwards has explained the logic behind his work, saying, “Prince Harry’s spirit must have died the day they told him he couldn’t serve [in Iraq].”
Why would one memorialize someone as being dead, when they are not? The above excuse by the artist does not fly. Why does this artist need to claim this “art” represents something that it clearly does not? Call it for what it is, anti-Iraq war art. One might also question the timing of this a “piece of art”. as the inquest into the death of his mother, Princess Diana occurs on the 10th anniversary of her death.
The statue is intended to be seen as a memorial to honour those who are willing but unable to serve in Iraq, artist Daniel Edwards said.
The memorial, which features the Prince laid out before the Union Jack with pennies placed over his eyes and his head resting on a bible, will go on show at the Trafalgar Hotel in central London next Thursday as part of the Bridge Art Fair.
David Kesting, a spokesman for the art fair, said: “This war memorial is dedicated to the brave at heart.
“But the brave men and women Prince Harry inspired to enlist for combat following his announcement to serve six months in Iraq are not forgotten.” (Breitbart)
Dead Prince Harry statue; Fury at US artist’s Iraq war sculpture
This statue of Prince Harry has sparked outrage after depicting him killed on a battlefield clutching a bloodied locket of mum Diana.
The controversial sculpture by US artist Daniel Edwards shows the prince lying with a vulture at his feet following his “death” in Iraq. In the final version, his ears will also be removed in a chilling reference to the threat by rebels to send him home without them. (Daily Mirror)