3 ms·
I remember reading Da Vinci Code (awful book) and he (the protagonist) made this claim, that there was a "Great Demasculation" to remove penises from statues.
by dharmon 8y ago
I remember reading Da Vinci Code (awful book) and he (the protagonist) made this claim, that there was a "Great Demasculation" to remove penises from statues.
I tried looking it up but couldn't find anything to support that this was true. But this was 2003 so information on the web wasn't as plentiful or easy to find.
A simpler explanation is, as you say, that they are just more easily broken.
- duxup 8y agoYeah if you're going to break a thing, internationally or not... the parts that stick out just seem easier.
- jfk13 8y agoAs illustrated by the Specsavers ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqOwg0dqApY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqOwg0dqApY
- Bartweiss 8y agoOn one hand, it's well-established that the Catholic Church was uncomfortable with nude art, not only in Christian works but in Roman-era 'heroic nudity'. On the other hand, the reason that's well-documented is that we know a great deal of art, including statuary, was altered by adding fig leaves and other concealments to hide nudity. I guess it's possible that lesser works were simply defaced instead of being altered, but given how much hand-wringing was devoted to altering statues, it's the sort of practice I'd expect to be well-documented, and I've never seen any evidence to that effect. I'd guess you're right: it's yet another case of Brown grabbing a random pattern and inserting meaning for it.