Sometimes the Germans make me ill - (discussion about a diorama)

This subject is one which I have thought about often before. It is though because it's a subject that distastes, disgusts, and offensives many people. When you make a dio which includes or is about something like deathand gore you're bound to create some kind of stir from all sorts of people. Those who would rather shut their eyes to all the "nasty things" in the world, those who are trying to protect their kids, those who do not agree with the topic and how you portrayed it.

Death is not a pretty thing, and that is why people get so hyper about it. Personally, I think that diorama's which carry the theme of war should be allowed to have death and gore in them.

War is about death, its about destruction, its about inflicting pain, suffering, fear, and death upon your opponent, that's why we have wars. As long as we are on earth there will be wars, just as there will always be greed and hate. and to completely shield ourselves from these facts is shear folly. Those who do so are..... well, they shouldn't.

By protraying death and gore in dio's and models, we bring to our audience the inescapable realities of war, and by doing so, we express how terrible war is, to everyone. I am not against wars, if and only if they are used as the very last resort. But if we show the public the truth behind wars, that there is no glory, then perhaps we can better prevent ourselves and future generations from turning to war as the best option for getting a point across.

I apologize if I sounded harsh or rash. I meant only to express my own opinion and feelings on the subject.

Personally I would never model execution style dioramas , I really don't care to view that sad part of human history either . But that gives me no right to judge those that do . What happened to the innocent during all wars is tragic , but during war we all have to remember , these are mostly really young folks following orders , they are afraid for thier own lives and have no idea who the enemy really is in some cases such as Viet Nam or Japanese or German conflicts . What we all should have hate for is the literal propaganda and lies that cause wars to begin in the first place . These are the true evil in out modern day world , not art that shows what happens when masses are misled . DDay dioramas would look very unrealistic if there are no casualties , thousands of allied and german lives were lost in those first few days. just my 2 cents and something to think about .

Well said Joe!

its kind of strange that we model things that in reality were vessels of destruction. we take these vessels and make them into pieces of art. we take these pieces of art and present them in a way that shows them tastefully doing what they were designed for.

if i get the question right it is about the displaying "bad things" in dios. my response is history had both good and bad. if the modeler displays the "bad things" in a tasteful way it can be a very powerful tool. the display of some subjects are not for forums such as this though.



joe

Well said proosh I agree .100% with you on this one

I made this diorama "Mopping Up" sometime ago. There are two dead German soldiers in the dio as you can see. And yes, there is blood. In this dio I am trying to portray the last days of the war where the allies are already in Berlin's doorstep.



The dead soldiers are necessary because IMHO war and death are almost synonymous. Of course we can portray the other sides of war but it would be totally wrong to forget that the war caused death to the allied soldiers, the german soldiers, japanese soldiers and most of all, to millions of civilians.

I agree with a lot that has been said, and would like to say that I have never seen a diorama that has crossed the line into bad taste, though I have seen several moving dioramas of controversial subject matter. I would however, feel free to point out to anyone who did cross such a line, how I feel about it, yet I would have to acknowledge the persons right to do it. Like Peter alluded to, I am suspicious of why such a line would be crossed; is it to shock on purpose? Or is it a genuine attempt to portray something? Is there a lack of respect? I have German and Japanese friends, and out of respect I do not talk to them about war as I would to a fellow modelling enthusiast. But I feel I have a right to model history, and not be criticised, as I feel I respect the subject matter.

I am currently doing my first ever diorama with someone being shot. My girlfriend asked if there was going to be blood. There isn't. She asked would there be a visible wound. There wouldn't. She looked confused, and I just said that I didn't think either were necessary to illustrate the soldier had been shot, and therefore, in my opinion would be gratuitous. It isn't that I feel there wouldn't be a time where it may be appropriate, it is just that if you can get the same effect without gore, all the better. Most people are so desensitized these days, it would probably be detrimental anyway.

Always say and do what you believe, but it doesn't hurt to check to see if there is a more sensitive way to do so, without having to compromise your beliefs. And this should never be confused with being politically correct, by the way.

That's it. Soapbox away for another few months. Back to mindless dribble for me.

Hi,

renarts,larry and pet bat are basically all correct..... but I think every body missed the big picture... we see dioramas like these in our forum, and sometime we don't like them... but they stay in the forum becaus they have not passed our moral/ethical tolerance.... The diorama was not built to shock but tell a story.... and trust me it did not pass the moral/ethical tolerance of the Germans either (which in either forum would justify removal)
I'll stay with my first assertion, anything that has to do with war is a very touchy subject in Germany....

Herr Gray

I"ve often seen Dio's representing the charge of the light brigade, horse's and riders dying and dead just as I've seen custers last stand showing troopers dead and only custer standing. I respected the builder and his craft because I know what it takes to produce figures and the required image of the Dio. In Custers case it could of been graphic with the troopers butchered but it wassn't and the builders still got the message across so if casualites could have been in the event your trying to create then so be it. I've never seen a distasteful model or Dio but I have seen what others call art that is truly disgusting but this is just my opinion.

Sure Larry, I agree with you. Once in a public forum it becomes subject to public scrutiny and the publics judgement of it. Also subject to the publics judgement of it and their acceptance or disapproval of it. This includes its removal as a result. A chance we take and something I'm willing to accept. In a venue such as a forum, show etc, we are not always protected by what we feel to be 1st ammendment rights. Societal moire determines that and if society overwhelmingly does not take to it then so be it. Away it goes.

As for what society accepts that is truly capricious. As you've said the imagery of rape is violent and distasteful. Yet the painting Rape of the Sabine women is consiered to be a masterpiece of art history. So what is considered art is subjective as well as fickle.

I personaly do not like to use violent imagery. (My imagination is brutal enough, I don't needed modeled in 3d) I like implied concepts. Letting the viewer decide and making his own conclusion.

I guess it all depends on what the dio is trying to depict. The heat of the battle, with one side gaining ground over another, there will always be dead or dying to depict that action. I remember seeing a magnificent Zulu wars dio many years ago. It depicted the Zulu warriors attacking the British at Rourke's Drift. No way that could have been done without dead and dying people. The dio was a tribute to the courage and honour of the VC winners and also the zulu warriors, not a tribute to the slaughter of people on both sides. There were no mutilated corpses, etc, So I guess you can say it was 'tastefully' done.

I have seen many other dio's with dead soldiers, WW1 trench scenes, teutonic knight battles, etc and a Apart from the 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail' Black Night dio (by nature more comic than gory), all were tastefully done without missing limbs etc.

Most Armour builders do not depict action scenes, as it is very difficult to represent dirt and dust thrown up by advancing vehicles. Our figures are generally crew at rest or the like or crews firing at some distant 'enemy'. Same goes for the flyboys and ship builders. This is really an area for figure guys and some armour dio guys.

In reality you are going to see far more blood and guts on the 'big screen' or the TV than you will ever see in a military dio. It is the theme behind the dio that is the point of contention not the figure content. As Larry has pointed out, there are some things that moral standards will not allow most human beings to accept such as Malmedy, etc.

I have no concerns with modelling SS vehicles, etc; They are a part of history. However, I would not consider doing anything other than representation of the vehicle, not the principles behind the organisation or the ruthless tactics employed by some of its members. If I was really that concerned about Facism or National Socialism I would not do a German vehicle at all. I depict history not politics. The same thing could be said for modelling the Japanese vehicles or figures - just ask an Aussie Digger about Changi prison or any of the slave labour camps. Jjust remember though, the Allies were not squeaky clean either. As they say "history is written by the victorious'.

All people have their own views and some will take a more conservative view than others. Tasteful, is a word defined only by the individual viewer. Personally, dismembered bodies serve no purpose other than a 'wow' factor I can do without. But a dead soldier in a dio, tells a story, and a message we should all remember - War is hell. Yes we model vehicles of war, yes we depict scenes from history, but do we want to depict attrocities? I think not.

Its a matter of taste; to dwell on graphic violence accomplishes nothing,
yet to establish arbitrary critiria is also self defeating. I don't build dioramas,
but I do enjoy them,& like any form of art, there will always be controversy.

QUOTE: I know there are some on this forum that refuse to build SS subject matter, Japanese subject matter, Confederate subject matter, and any other subject that may cause some controversy for someone. That is thier burden not ours.

I might call it a choice rather than a burden. After all, all of us have things we have no problem building, and things we don't want to build.

QUOTE: I again assert that we build for ourselves. If I want to build 2 airliners smacking into the WTC I will. I'll also face any objection that occurs if I choose to submit it for public scrutiny. Show me in any art form where there is no controversy.

Well yeah, but at the same time you're not suggesting that anything goes here, are you? How about graphic sculpts of people having sex? I think the point of PP's original post is to say that he doesn't like the fact that dioramas including casualties were censored from a German board. That leaves open some room for an interesting discussion of regulation of content. In the end, I doubt that any of us really feels that absolutely anything is ok to post in a public forum like FSM.

QUOTE: People who complain about death and gore in dioramas obviously don't know much about war.

I must admit that I find that to be a perplexing statement. If I complain about a graphic painting of a rape, that doesn't necessarily mean that I don't know what rape is. It means I find the rape to be disgusting and depressing, and the image offensive. You can certainly portray soldiers and weapons systems without having to portray casualties. It's not necessarily part of depictions of war. (Note that I'm not taking sides, I just don't agree with that assertion.)

Until now the topic is'nt removed and the discussion is going on ( alike here I see :)
It's hard to draw a sharp line beetween blur things, this dio is well done in any way. If the creator of this dio would show ripped off heads or such stuff it would turn into distastefulness. This dio has a perfect balance.

P.S. My Tiger pics are online : www.boorad.de click on the tank icon

We've certainly been here before.
I again assert that we build for ourselves. If I want to build 2 airliners smacking into the WTC I will. I'll also face any objection that occurs if I choose to submit it for public scrutiny. Show me in any art form where there is no controversy. I know there are some on this forum that refuse to build SS subject matter, Japanese subject matter, Confederate subject matter, and any other subject that may cause some controversy for someone. That is thier burden not ours.

Taste and aesthetic are individual appreciations and are understood by their owners. It is not for anyone to judge whether its wrong or right, only if it caters to their individual emotions, aesthetics and criteria. Simply, either they like it or they don't...and then they can move on.

I feel bad for those that have to carry the burden of guilt for previous generations.

We can as part of our presentation to others make imagination spark a more emotional reaction simply by assumed violence rather than displayed violence. I think the example I used previously was you can be shocked by a photo of a human being turned into so much tenderized meat and have a shock value that leaves nothing, people will disassociate themselves from the violence and turn on certain psycological defenses. Or you can see a photo of a soldier looking into the lens with a 1000 yard stare, physicly exhausted and wonder and let imagination imply the horrors that he's seen.

Back in the 70's, Larry Flint did a great layout in Hustler magazine as to what was obscene. He faced it with a what the legal system at the time considered obscene with his magazine and then showed some of the most horrific combat photography from VietNam that I've ever seen. Commenting on "this is obsenity."

As was said. Art is personal.

I think it is distasteful to use excessive casualties in adiorama. In no way does this glorify war. It is representing a significant event in the past. I model armor because I admire the craftsmanship on the tank.

The thought of questioning the content of a war diorama is a joke! No one should be able to cover up what happens in war. It should be simple, if you build a war scene, casualties are allowed. I mean, it's not like people don't know there is death during wars. It's stupid not to face the fact that people die all the time in war, and it's even dumber when people build a diorama suited to peoples feedback. People who complain about death and gore in dioramas obviously don't know much about war. It's not wonderful. If you go to war... you will see people die and you might die to! How could someone hide that?!?!

I just finished a compact battle scene where three people have died. One is seen being thrown back from a shot to the chest. Think of how lame dioramas are when all the figures are pointing guns but no fire is hitting anything. It's not lazer tag!! It's supposed to be real! In a museum in Calgary, I saw a diorama of WW1 in the trenches in which I recalled seeing at least 100 dead soldiers from both sides rotting in trenches, shells going off, people thrown from the blast, and blood everywhere. That's the reality of war. Not a bunch on un-scarred soldiers standing upright, pointing rifles gloriously in valour.

When you design a diorama remember, war can't be censored.

I have seen a well presented dio of grerman soldiers and some jews that were about to be executed. There were no fatalities shown but only the expectation that they were about to happen. There were alot of very harsh comments towrds the builder for doing such a dio. My feeling toward it was that the mood it was presenting was one of rememberance of what had happened. It was nothing close to what I have seen in movies about what happened to the Jewish and yet it recieved a harsh critisim, I think what we do is history and that the only difference between our work and that of a combat photographer is that you can walk around and see all angles of our finished product.

This is a hobby. We can build the models to depict actual vehicles or battles, and yet at the same time we build them to look like anything we want. We can put King Tiger Tank turrets on M1 Abrams hulls if we so choose.

When it comes to wounded or dead it should be done tastefully. In htere lies the catch. What is tasteful? Everyone has an opinion on this. What I think is ok the next person may find it offensive.

We do this because we like to. For some people it is a history lesson on a particular vehicle, unit, or battle. Most of us spend hours researching on the net , in books or talking to veterans when we start to build a new kit.

Remember this........If we are not carefull history will repeat itself with devastating conscequences.

Panzerpabst,

I think you missed the root of you problem, you are dealing with two differnt cultures. One forum is German the other American (more like internationl but Germany is unique).... two very differnt cultures... (Trust me I know, I am an American living in Germany). Germany has still not come to terms with her actions in WWII, and to this day Germany still carrys that guilt.... I know this personally if you ask most Germans something about WWII or the Holocost you will get an apology in reply. Think about it .
I think that if the dio had shown a wounded German, the response might have been differnt, but in this case the wounded guy was an American..... you know the good guys.
The response to me is typical.....

Herr Gray

Is this hobby an art? If it is, is censorship appropriate? Or is it more technical in nature? I don't really know, I think it is OK to depict casualties as long as it can't be construed as obscene.

My feelings on this are if you choose to be accurate in your portrayals in your Dio's then sometimes that happens. As for be tasteful, does that mean just over do it for the shock or accurately represent a horrific scene that had happened. What does Shock mean? If you are just doing it for blood and guts to watch people to turn green, thats more of a hollywood dio. But, if it is something that really happened it should be shown by all means and not be censored. If people try to censor it they are in the wrong place and should move on.

This is a subjective topic, if anything.
A dio can be anything in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I don't think that removal of ANY kind of diorama (well, almost any) from this forum is just wrong. As long as the diorama is done tastefully, I don't see a problem. It really is nothing more than a few pieces of plastic and a base with some paint. The idea that people don't want to look at this is absurd. If you don't want to look at it, don't, but don't force such things to be removed.

QUOTE: Here's a question -- how would you guys feel about a diorama of Das Reich in France, in the process of massacring villagers in retaliation for resistance attacks, like at Oradour? Or maybe the massacre of prisoners from the 285th by the 1st SS at Malmedy?

Good point. I don't see anything with dio's representing these horrors. The fact is, they DID happen, and we're exposed to so much violence in much more gruesome forms in all sorts of other entertainment, so why should we be censored for a simple diorama?

QUOTE: Originally posted by feldgrau23 I will close by saying this to those of you that feel we should not read about or teach our kids about our past wars. "Those who chose to ignore it are condemned to repeat it."

Is that why we model? To teach our kids about past wars?

I don't know how I feel about his, though I do recall a big stink at a show a few years ago when someone depicted a dead soldier laying on cobblestones near a German armored car in a pool of blood on a diorama.

I choose not to have an opinion.

Yeah Larry I remember that dio. It was a large one as I recall. Its funny My father and I had a disscusion about this last nite. My feeling is that death is apart of war. Now does that mean we should build a Dio or a model that is full of dead guys with blood and guts? Of course not that would be, as far as I am concerned , glorifiying war. Now the occaisional dead soilder in a dio is not a bad thing as long is its done tastefully. Now I also remeber this same topic eing discussed here previosly and my statements were about the same as everyone elses.

I will close by saying this to those of you that feel we should not read about or teach our kids about our past wars.

"Those who chose to ignore it are condemned to repeat it."

Now I will get off my soap box.

Hmmm, ok -- I may not have seen it because many images here are posted on free webhosts, and I am blocked to access to those here at work.

Here's a question -- how would you guys feel about a diorama of Das Reich in France, in the process of massacring villagers in retaliation for resistance attacks, like at Oradour?

Or maybe the massacre of prisoners from the 285th by the 1st SS at Malmedy? Russian soldiers raping German girls in East Prussia? The Mi Lai massacre?

Is the line drawn at soldiers in uniform, killed in battle? In what condition can the corpses be in? Some corpses are in really bad shape, either due to battle damage or to decay.

Come to think of it, I think Verlinden makes dead livestock, a common sight in European wars, don't they?

QUOTE: Originally posted by Larry_Dunn [I don't think I've ever seen a diorama with casualties on it on this forum. Anyone?

There have been several. The one that comes to mind is the D-Day diorama that included everything from the landing craft (with waterspout explosions) up the beach to a bunker. That dio had several casualties, if I recall correctly.

I don't see a problem with it at all.

Looking forward to the pics of the Tiger, PP.

So you're saying that on another forum, images of dead soldiers are depicted in dioramas, and it was removed for questionable content? I don't think I've ever seen a diorama with casualties on it on this forum. Anyone?