Talk:Gerald Scarfe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sculptor[edit]

The article makes mention only of his sculpture for the Millennium Dome. I saw his exhibition including artwork for the Wall in the early 80s and there was a considerable amount of sculptural work (with similar wit). Stub Mandrel (talk) 10:31, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Family[edit]

According to https://amalfimio.wordpress.com/2016/06/19/whos-dating-who-misinformation/ Gerald and first wife were together from ca. 1959 to ca. 1969, not 1966-1969 as you post. They had one son, Rupert Alexander (b. December 9th 1966, d. February 5th 2015). His second wife was children's writer Marcia Williams (b. August 8th, 1945). They woked together, and have one daughter together, Araminta: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3445400079.html Finally, he and Asher have 3 children, daughter Katie (b. 17 April 1974) and sons Alexander (b. December 1981) and Rory (b. 1984). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.32.117.89 (talk) 12:16, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interview last night[edit]

Floydian Slip conducted an interview with Scarfe which aired last night. The transcript can be found here. I already used it as a source for a bit of the intro but others may want to pick more bits from it for the article here. Dismas|(talk) 11:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Israel Cartoon section[edit]

Giving this story a separate section gives it hugely disproportionate importance. While a few sources described the content as 'anti-semitic', a great many more Israeli media sources argued the complete opposite, and there appears to be no logical substance to the allegations. While the cartoon itself is clearly not argued to be anti-semitic, there's also the fact that the JC reported that he'd written to them confirming that he didn't select Holocaust day for publication; even if he had, accusations of anti-semitism would still be exceptionally niche. As a result, for the time being this has been changed to a sub-section, and given a bit more balance, but I'd be interested to hear any feedback on how this part could be made more appropriately neutral. Marty jar (talk) 19:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely right Marty Jar. I do not think anyone familiar with Scarfe's huge body of work could in any rational sense describe him as antisemitic. Scarfe is a fearless observer of the human condition and war, racism and mans inhumanity to man are constantly recurrent themes. He puts his graphic boot into anyone wallowing in these activities irrespective of their race, religion or politics. I've been a Scarfe admirer since the early 1970s and his devastatingly powerful graphic and even obscene cartoons have made many think and question their beliefs and casual acceptence of political propaganda and spin. For instance Scarfe has highlighted the plight of black people many times, who could forget his astonishing and shocking images of Prime Minister Ian Smith of Rhodesia dancing round hanging black corpses or sewing on to himself a severed black phallus. Funny, disturbing and thought provoking. Coarse, vulgar, disgusting? Yes but not as disgusting as the true crime Scrafe was drawing your attention too. The supposed validity and legitimacy of the Viet Nam war and Nixon were dealt a serious and greatly undermining blow by Scarfe in his hayday on the world stage. Some of those catroons are hard to look at. His pen has not lost any of its sharpness and more recently cartoons like "Diana's relationship with the Press" have caused some to spit their dummy teat out. The power to shock should encourage reflection and thought. Scarfe is not antisemitic, but you certainly could argue that he is dismayed at mans inhumanity to his fellows and this alone is what fuels his pen. So I agree the paragraph in question in the article is massivly disproportionate and out of context with his life. If Wikipedia had existed in 1970 then the article would be choked solid with moans from just about every major politician and their sycophants. Its sad but Wiki content often only tells you the age of the contributors, not to mention highlighting their lack of knowledge. Cartoons and controversy are nothing new and long may that continue. Put it into perspective- Scarfe does not have one controversial cartoon but hundreds. If you include the controversy over this one cartoon then you must include ALL the others. Cherrypicking one incident looks like servicing a personal agenda and that is outside the remit of Wikipedia. In good faith. Alex M. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.35.245 (talk) 00:58, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And yet, the section persists, maintaining the one-sided view. Many, many people throughout the world, of all nationalities and religious persuasions, condemn atrocities. The subject of the cartoon has supported perpetration of many himself. But what place has a balance of information on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.212.63 (talk) 05:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gerald Scarfe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:08, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gerald Scarfe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gerald_Scarfe&oldid=1210244158"