Art is culture, right?

Forcing someone to wear a poppy (as the BBC appear to do before someone is allowed to appear on any of their programmes) goes against all the principles of freedom which were fought for and so hard won and which the poppy symbolizes.

I find that ironic and in fact quite disturbing.

For anyone interested in the wider implications of WW1 and the numbers of people who died, including civilians. I recommend this Quaker map
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=ztmNGmuUWfH0.k5FfbOPspjLI

The numbers are appalling. The Quakers also have some interesting things about war resisters and the white poppy
www.quaker.org.uk/ww1map

Well, of course it should be somebody's choice as to whether they wear a poppy or not, but as John Walsh says in The I today, "everyone who appears on British TV must be seen wearing a poppy - newsreaders, politicians, game-show hosts (and contestants), football managers" - except for Jon Snow, that is, who has consistently refused to wear one while he is broadcasting.

Some don the mantle of self-righteousness, believing that their attitude to war is, as if by divine right, the correct one - any opposing points of view somehow going against the "natural" order of things.

It is not the case that those who question the role of the Remembrance commemorations are pacifists (many former soldiers have also expressed uneasiness). Some undoubtedly are, but others have come to question the UK's role in recent wars and its appetite for further military spending.

If it is true that soldiers fought for the right of people to remain "free" (which no doubt most soldiers needed to, did - and continue to - believe in), then those that believe it is important to challenge views that are so often presented as beyond questioning should be at liberty to do so, without having their views described as "sordid".

I have no 'hostility' towards the Tower display. Just feel uneasy about it. As I have said in my posts.

I find village war memorials more moving.

Poppies work well, as regards making money.
They sell to the masses.
Which seems to be a lot of the point.

Presumably the young buy them as well, so I dont see the whole thing stopping anytime soon.

Wasnt going to add more. But as the debate is carrying on.

Personally I dont get why everyone keeps going on about ww1 in particular.
I personally felt I learnt my lessons about it back in the sixties, when my dad watched endless war things.

We are still going on and on about it 50 years later.

And I am beginning to have more than a sneaky suspicion that it seems to have contributed to more wars not less.
Men in particular watching war stuff seems to inspire more war, not less.

This is good! A 360-degree view.

home.bt.com/news/uk-news/millions-flock-to-towers-stunning-poppy-tribute-11363942007046

At the end of the day irrespective of which way your opinion falls the fact remains it is 'possibly' because of the sacrifices made by those who fought which allows us the opportunity to free speech to air them.

If I choose to remember that fact by wearing a poppy, because I want to, then it is not up to anybody or organisation to tell me I am wrong. I don't care if somebody doesn't wish to wear a poppy, that's their choice, I wouldn't dream of telling somebody you should wear a poppy.

I find the whole debate about the poppy in general and particularly the Tower display nothing more than sordid.

If a display were in situ, where, as suggested, it was a memorial constructed of mud and barbed wire I would be mature enough to accept that has a value too because no offence could be taken if the 'true' meaning behind it was to remind us of what hell war can be and to keep in our minds how people suffered because of it. I would not however say that it was wrong and make cheap shot remarks.

I agree we don't need a history lesson on the subject. We don't know how we would have behaved given the fact we were at war with a country/countries that were a threat to our lives and children and on our doorstep, not in some far off land. It's all fine and dandy to espouse a view having the privilege of historical hindsight but that's all it can ever be, a view.

How sad there is such hostility over a subject that doesn't have a scrap of vengeance about it.

And I think they are tacky. Like so many things today.

The paper poppy we pay our pound for in the street is a symbol of remembrance. These, I think, are glorifying.

And maybe he's right - we should be remembering the Germans and Italians who died. They were ordinary men too.

Incidentally, I have just noticed that the boxes containing the poppy wreaths which will be laid at Centophs are made in a Remploy factory.

And let's get down to the nitty-gritty shall we?

As well as a symbol of remembrance, hope and a fervent desire for peace, the Poppy Appeal raises money to help servicemen and their families and ex-servicemen and their families. Other charities have sprung up in recent years to support ex-servicemen but I don't think that any are as wide-reaching as the RBL.

The poppies make money. They do not glorify war. I am just wondering how much money these other works of art mentioned by JJ make for Forces personnel? Worthy, thought-provoking but pretty useless really when it comes to struggling with everyday life in the aftermath of a war.

All of which does not make most people agree with war. We would all like to live in Utopia but with fear, greed and hatred still part of the human psyche I doubt that will happen.

I think we are being given an unnecessary history lesson. I think most of us are fully aware (I am, and I am sure FlicketyB is, although I cannot of course speak for her) of what went on in WW1; the horrors, the shooting of 'cowards', the white feathers, the terrible loss of life, the psychological warfare that went on to encourage men to join up.
We know about the barbed wire, the mud, the trenches, the rats, trench-foot and all the other horrors; the shunning of anyone who dared to disagree, the young men with shell shock who were shot for being cowards. I know because DH and I have relatives who were there, although they would not necessarily wish to talk about it.

Yes, we know.

But that does not stop us looking on those poppies as a symbol both of that and of hope and a desire for peace, something good out of something terrible.

I think that each of those poppies has been bought by someone in remembrance of a relative lost in that awful war, and they should be sent to them as soon as possible after 11th November this year - something lasting to pass on to future generations in the hope that they will not have to go through the same dreadful experiences.
It isn't art, it is not a 'garden centre ceramic poppy', it is a symbol of remembrance.

Politicians make war, the population makes sacrifices. Aggression is wrong, defence is sometimes inevitable.
Some politicians in recent years both here and abroad do not seem able to understand the difference.

In case anyone is wondering what the original article was about this is it

and these are some works of art he links to

I think I agree with JJ. Perhaps garden centre ceramic poppies do not quite cut the mustard.

I spoke of men willingly flocking to the recruitment offices at the start of the war. After that recruitment was based on campaigns to encourage men to enlist and in the later stages by conscription. My grandfather was a conscript, not a volunteer, but at the start men enthusiastically joined up to fight the Germans.

Conscientious objectors were regarded as scum a century ago.

Flickety You say about WWI that "to begin with men in the UK willingly flocked to join the forces and fight the enemy".

By 1915 a substantial proportion of the regular army was dead and the country looked to volunteers to fill the gap. History books reveal the central role of propaganda as a recruitment tool in WWI. This included, posters such as "Daddy, what did you do in the Great War?", "To the women of Britain ............. Won't you help and send a man to join the army today". The underlying theme of all these posters was that only those men (and their wives and children) who enlisted could hold their heads high. Those that were reluctant to enlist were portrayed as unpatriotic and cowardly and eventually became "willing" volunteers. The wives and families of conscientious objectors often received white feathers and they and their children were likely to be shunned and ridiculed by at least some of their neighbours.

A similar drop in recruitment occurred following the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and several reports were commissioned to make recommendations regarding effective strategies to improve recruitment. These included a "wider use of uniforms", a "more systematic approach to homecoming parades", "annual outreach programmes", "encouraging media activity", etc. etc. It seems that manipulative means are needed to normalise the idea of war and to encourage participation in it.

Yes, the word Picasso gave me a hint!

It was definitely Madrid! I was in! (I was calling it Milan even when we were there! )

I don't think we are 'over-egging' their importance, more missing the whole point of them.
They aren't a work of art, they are a memorial.
Totally different thing.

Milan is the one in Italy with all the fashion, Madrid is somewhere in the middle of Spain (I think)
(I looked it up on Google maps, aren't I clever!)

I meant Madrid. Why do I keep calling it "Milan"?!

#ageingbrain

Perhaps we are over-egging the importance of these ceramic poppies. When I was in Milan recently, I stood in front of Picasso's Guernica. That picture made me cry.

I don't think these poppies are a work of art.

I object most strongly to the assertion that that I and flicketyb are immersed in the nostalgia-romance. What have either of us said to support that contention, beyond disagree with you? In fact, I would like you to withdraw that statement.

Our family has borne its fair share of loss; we do not look on war, especially WW1, in a romantic fashion and are fully and totally aware of the dreadfulness of war and the sorrow and loss that can ensue.
When we go to the Remembrance Sunday parade and service this Sunday and again on Tuesday we shall be giving thanks for their sacrifice, not glorifying war or romanticising it in any way. We do the same on 25th April each year. I am fully aware of the families who lost their sons - each year I hear our friend movingly read the names out in church and do not need to be told by you to stand at the war memorial and read the names. I know most of them by heart.

War is dreadful. These men sacrificed their lives in the hope that we can live ours in peace, and peace is what is prayed for fervently every year at Remembrance Services throughout the country. The poppy is a symbol of the blood that was shed, a symbol of remembrance but also of hope. Without hope we are diminished.

Poets are still people and some enjoy war, Sassoon called it jingoism. I'll stick to the Wilfred Owen's lines on the WW1 poets memorial in Westminster Abbey "My subject is War,and the pity of War. The poetry is in the pity"
Could give you Owen's "Anthem for Doomed Youth" as a counter to your poem but I leave you to read it if you wish.
The poppy's image has not been improved by this installation whatever it's original intention.

I think that the poppy display has both good and bad points.
Personally, I dont do much of the looking back at life stuff in general.
But others do, and if the poppies help with that, fair enough.

Would agree with what someone wrote upthread.
I dont think that art critics can afford to be seen as part of the masses.

I hope all children at school still learn the war poets.