Gransnet forums


To think the real crime was creating a £1m gold toilet?

(38 Posts)
suziewoozie Sat 14-Sep-19 20:56:08

I hope it’s already been melted down😱

Callistemon Mon 16-Sep-19 11:37:34

BradfordLass it seems to have passed me by too.

However, I did see a loo yesterday in the outback which had a wall signed by a descendant of Thomas Crapper grin

We're not entirely out of the loop here!

Callistemon Mon 16-Sep-19 11:40:24

In fact, we may be miles from civilisation as you know it, but it's business as usual

Apricity Mon 16-Sep-19 11:46:37

Suziewoozie, I'm with you. A gold toilet, whether plated or solid is quite literally a load of crap. A social statement!!! Oh please. What pretentious rubbish.

So many jokes, the people who think the sun shines out of their 'bottom', all that glitters etc. If pissing or pooing in a 'golden' loo gives someone a thrill I think they need to have a really, really big think about their life, their values and quite simply their humanity.

HildaW Mon 16-Sep-19 12:05:30

I beg to differ - Elegran's point is that it was created as a satire on excess...its entitled 'America' and it might be pertinent that Trump was offered it but refused it......not as green as he's cabbage …..etc??

Yes, its an example of ghastly excess but that was the point (according to the artist) I doubt the money would have been used for anything worthwhile and to be honest the money in the art world is all a bit suspect anyway.

Most artists would say they create, in part, to provoke and create interest - its what has been done by the likes of Goya, Picasso and Banksy and no do will continue to do so. The whole solid gold thing is a bit excessive but at least we live in a part of the world where people can be outrageous (without harming anyone) and shake us up a bit.

crystaltipps Mon 16-Sep-19 12:52:20

It’s s bit like the royal family really isn’t it- show of excess which people gawp at. Gets people gossiping. But unlike the royals we haven’t paid for it.

Elegran Mon 16-Sep-19 15:13:26

Apricity I don't think anyone was expected to pee, poo or puke into that gold toilet (it doesn't seem to have been plumbed in!), any more than anyone was expected to build themselves a house out of Carl Andre's pile of 120 firebricks that were a leading exhibit at the Tate in 1966. This loo d'or was at labelled "America" to make it clear that it was a satirical comment on the level of taste currently to be found in that home of the almighty dollar.

HildaW Mon 16-Sep-19 15:25:35

Elegran, that's the whole thing, it was plumbed in and you could have used it.....the robbery made quite a mess because they just ripped it out of the wall.....its one of the reason's the security was felt to be good......but hey ho if you are just going to rip it out and not worry about the contents!

Elegran Mon 16-Sep-19 15:35:43

I didn't see that bit, Hilda.

Many years ago my gran visited a royal residence on a conducted tour, and afterwards visited a public toilet near the coach park on the estate. When she got home she was quite chuffed to have been in the queen's loo - I can imagine her account of using a solid gold one! I can also imagine her comments on anyone being rich enough to HAVE a gold one.

Those comments are the kind that the artist was trying to stir up - and seems to have succeeded in doing!

HildaW Mon 16-Sep-19 15:40:31

Quite Elegran… the point that some feel the theft could be a hoax/ certainly occurred to me....but then I'm a cynical old thing!

M0nica Mon 16-Sep-19 16:08:41

For many people in some less developed countries to have access to a proper loo would be worth its weight in gold.

I have no time for artists or works of art like this. It isn't art. It is a publicity stunt that they justify by making some pious remark about pointing the finger at ludicrous wealth.

If that is what they want to do, why not make some millionaires plaything itself the centre of attention. One of Sir Philiup Green's many grossly ostentatious yachts for example.

Elegran Mon 16-Sep-19 16:37:20

The yacht would be a bit harder to put on display, though, and wouldn't have the same air of decadently associating luxury with unattractive bodily functions.

M0nica Tue 17-Sep-19 11:00:55

But that theme is so passe. Marcel Duchamps did it in 1917 - and we talk about the filthy ricj, so nothing remarkable about that.

I think the yacht would be ideal because it would be luxury far beyond the cost of the loo with money no object from bedrooms to bathrooms to state rooms etc and if you could get all three yachts, just the cost of getting them there, - that is true obscene extravagence