Tuesday, October 25 , 2016, 3:36 pm | Fair 68º


She Said, Z Said: Plinth Schminth, and a Statue with Limitations

When mall art rises to the level of phallic symbols, is it still a pedestrian display?

Z: Why is there a giant new phallic statue in Paseo Nuevo?

She: I have no idea what you’re talking about. All I saw was a ginormous Christmas Tree. You must have a dirty mind, honey. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Z: And in this case, a giant phallic statue is just a giant phallic statue. Or, if you’d rather, a giant, round plinth with a crown on top. Tomato tomahto.

She: I just looked. You’re right. That’s one giant phallic symbol in the middle of Paseo Nuevo. And I kind of doubt that’s a holiday symbol.

Z: Do you think they’ll change the name to Phalleo Nuevo?

She: Sounds like the prelude to a fabulous City Council meeting.

Z: I’d even put my good citizen hat on for that one.

She: I did see a sign saying the statue’s not complete, yet. They’re going to add an angel to the top of it.

Z: Ohh, I get it now. They’re going for some sort of edgy twist on “counting the angels on the head of a pin.” That seems an odd choice for a shopping mall.

She: Not that I have anything against giant phallic symbols, but I wonder what was wrong with the previous fountain and courtyard?

Z: Not enough phalluses. Phalli?

She: I liked that old courtyard. The arch was lovely. It looked like a rising, blue-tiled wave with a porthole.

Z: It was also a great place for our child to climb up on and fall off of. He’s going to need pitons and carabiners to scale the phallus.

She: I’m not entirely sold on the new shape of the courtyard, either. It’s got a weird angle at one side now, instead of a nice smooth horseshoe. It’s almost as though they’re trying to discourage children from running straight around it.

Z: It’s like the Soviet Union or something.

She: I guess you don’t have to “get” art to see the value in it. What’s the value in it?

Z: Well, I do like that we finally have some controversial pubic art. Pianos on State hasn’t annoyed anyone, except maybe the occasional shopkeeper who has to listen to “Chopsticks” all day.

She: True. I think the last good public art controversy was Colin Gray’s “W” upside down McDonald’s logo of 2006.

(sagehillmpegs video)

Z: That was a Whopper. I think we should stir up some trouble and start a group that’s opposed to the new plinth. We could call ourselves Phallus Malice.

She: You’re the only person who finds that amusing.

Z: Which is bad why?

She: Just don’t start with the chalice from the palace or we’ll be in a Monty Python skit before we know it.

Z: Which would be freaking awesome. Don’t try to deny me that.

She: I wouldn’t dare. Although I just looked it up and it’s from a Danny Kaye movie, The Court Jester.

Z: As a longtime fan of the brew that is true, I could have told you that — but I was too busy pondering the plinth that makes me grinth.

She: On the plus side for the artist, if the only criticism he receives is from two idiots who love bad word play, then keep building them giant phallic symbols.

Z: Honestly, who cares? I love the new statue/plinth/giant-phallic-thingy. I see nothing but decades of jokes in our future mall visits. Best Black Friday ever.

She: Yes, dear.

— Want to make a point about public art? Share it with She and Z by emailing .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Follow She and Z on Twitter: @lesliedinaberg. Click here for previous She Said, Z Said columns.

Reader Comments

Noozhawk's intent is not to limit the discussion of our stories but to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and must be free of profanity and abusive language and attacks.

By posting on Noozhawk, you:

» Agree to be respectful. Noozhawk encourages intelligent and impassioned discussion and debate, but now has a zero-tolerance policy for those who cannot express their opinions in a civil manner.

» Agree not to use Noozhawk’s forums for personal attacks. This includes any sort of personal attack — including, but not limited to, the people in our stories, the journalists who create these stories, fellow readers who comment on our stories, or anyone else in our community.

» Agree not to post on Noozhawk any comments that can be construed as libelous, defamatory, obscene, profane, vulgar, harmful, threatening, tortious, harassing, abusive, hateful, sexist, racially or ethnically objectionable, or that are invasive of another’s privacy.

» Agree not to post in a manner than emulates, purports or pretends to be someone else. Under no circumstances are readers posting to Noozhawk to knowingly use the name or identity of another person, whether that is another reader on this site, a public figure, celebrity, elected official or fictitious character. This also means readers will not knowingly give out any personal information of other members of these forums.

» Agree not to solicit others. You agree you will not use Noozhawk’s forums to solicit and/or advertise for personal blogs and websites, without Noozhawk’s express written approval.

Noozhawk’s management and editors, in our sole discretion, retain the right to remove individual posts or to revoke the access privileges of anyone who we believe has violated any of these terms or any other term of this agreement; however, we are under no obligation to do so.

» on 11.26.12 @ 07:53 PM

Please tell me that Z’s comment on “controversial pubic art” did not involve a typo!

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through PayPal below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments.

Thank you for your vital support.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >