[–] Eideard [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I know you are focused on the art, where I am focused on the law, both positions have merit, sure.
I guess, to me, focusing on the art, is more seeing the bee to spite the hive.
On that topic, don't you think a tomb stone, which predates a cross on a grave (started around the 19th century), be just as effective? Halloween decorations use them quite effectively. I know it is silly and fairly pedantic, just was wondering if you would be just as OK with such a change?
[–] WillisJaxson 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Looks like he's tired from shooting mortars all day.
I appreciate the points you make. I'm just saying for a simple silhouette, a cross stuck in the ground makes it immediately recognizable as a grave. Could the artist have used a headstone, cairn, burial urn, or the like? Sure!
Here's the way I see it though. It's a given that a cross in the ground marks a grave. What isn't a given is the beliefs of the soldier mourning the loss of his fallen companion. I would think the point of the work is a soldier grieving the loss of a friend. The piece conveys that message. I don't see it as a nod to state sponsored religion.
[–] Eideard [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Fun photoshop but I was thinking more like the one on the left
What is amusing, this is not even good art, it appears somebody took a clip-art and cut it out of plywood, here is the clip-art:
http://fscomps.fotosearch.com/compc/CSP/CSP689/k6897444.jpg