26

Amateur Restorer Totally Messes Up A 500 Year Old Statue And People Are Not Having It

By nadine / jeudi 5 juillet 2018 10:00
Imagine being commissioned to restore 500 year old art and thinking: "I got this! I don't have a ton of experience, but I've gotta believe in myself! YOLO!" and then realizing preeetttyyy quickly that you F'd up? Now that's an FML.

 

A 16th century wooden carving of St George on horseback, battling a dragon has been restored in a way that many locals are not too happy about.

According to The New York Post, a priest of the church, which is located in northern Spain, asked a local schoolteacher to do the restoration work. The woman reportedly works as an arts and crafts teacher.

Not exactly your professional restorist. 

When the new work was unveiled to the public, many people immediately took to social media to criticize the restoration work, saying that the artist made the carving look cartoonish, with some people even comparing the carving to the Belgian comic TinTin.

Others compared the botched job to the famous Ecce Homo painting, which was destroyed in a similar way. 

What do you guys think? Is it as bad as everyone says, or was it bad to begin with? Let us know in the comments!

Add a comment
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
Create my account Sign in
Top comments
By  DragonMaiden7  |  13

I’m not religious, but art is precious. When it comes to art restoration, instead of trying to save money and getting amateurs to restore a piece hundreds of years old, maybe fork up the cash and get a professional, or give the piece of art to a museum who CAN afford to properly take care of it? This is how we lose valuable pieces of art and pieces of history, to people who think they are doing good or who are just too cheap to care

Comments
By  DragonMaiden7  |  13

I’m not religious, but art is precious. When it comes to art restoration, instead of trying to save money and getting amateurs to restore a piece hundreds of years old, maybe fork up the cash and get a professional, or give the piece of art to a museum who CAN afford to properly take care of it? This is how we lose valuable pieces of art and pieces of history, to people who think they are doing good or who are just too cheap to care

Reply
  julfunky  |  22

Exactly. You don’t just hire the local arts and crafts teacher to handle such a big project. You actually find someone who does this for a living.

That said, I’m not a huge fan of art restoration in general. The beauty of art (to me) lies in its original form. Unless, of course, it’s completely destroyed to the point that you can’t even see any of it.

Reply
  Mr_Mole  |  24

Too many negative votes, comment buried. Show the comment

Reply
  DragonMaiden7  |  13

I tend to agree julfunky. When someone takes good care of a piece of art, it can last a long time, but if it was lost for centuries, or has been traded and switched hands for generations it can be in rough condition.

I think we should touch up art simply for the preservation of it, so it can last for even more generations to come. Completely restoring it more often than not destroys the true value of the piece or destroys the rice altogether

Reply
  DragonMaiden7  |  13

Mr_Mole I wanted to ignore your comment, but it’s been seriously bugging me all day.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and art can mean different things to different people. However, the reason why someone is a famous artist is not because they just make ‘something pretty’ or because of their ‘technique’. What makes a renowned artist was their contribution to the world of art, their passion and their imagination, their creative drive and their ingenuity, their understanding of the human body, their interpretation of the world around them and in some cases a way to get closer to God.

These artists created a legacy, their works are masterpieces because they put themselves into their art. Their art contributed to the evolution of our culture and the growth of society. To simply dismiss art as pretentious shows you have no idea the impact art has on the world or on humanity, and shows your ignorance and arrogance.

Reply
  Nadine  |  20

Also, Mr_Mole, you brought up Picasso as an example of mediocre art. I'm curious to know if you've explored his museums or really researched him.... A lot of people only think of his abstract cubism when they think of Picasso. They don't know what he was capable of beyond that. He became famous for his Cubism for different reasons (many of which, DragonMaiden7 named,) but he only did that later on in his life. Check out his earlier work -- though I don't think his earlier pieces make him a 'better' artist, and I definitely think that the spectrum on which you're defining good art is far too one dimensional; I think you may be surprised to see some of his more detailed, lifelike work.

Reply
  Mr_Mole  |  24

You’re not changing my mind. It’s all nonsensical crap. And don’t get me started on modern art. I’ll happily take my ignorance and leave you pretentious people alone.

Reply
  DragonMaiden7  |  13

Mr_Mole You sure we’re the pretentious ones? The only one who is acting like they know better than everyone and who literally just admitted to being ignorant is YOU.

I’m also not trying to change your mind. You’re just flat out wrong. People who are stuck in their ways will never change, but I don’t hate you. I pity you.

Henry Moore once said, “To be an artist, is to believe in life,”. Your mind is too closed off to see the world the way it could be seen.

By  wmayrhofer  |  12

The old one wasn't that good either, the original artist probably got as much flak. Both versions have a spaced out look that does not go well with battling a dragon.

Similar
Loading data…