this is a somewhat delicate, yet necessary subject: the depiction of fallen soldiers in diorama scenes. In my country many people in the modeling community find this objectionable. Others, taking a more realistic view, argue that this too is a part of history.
Since I don’t have much spare time to spend philosophizing about it, I simply use whatever figures I can get my hands on incorporating them as I interpret reality.
I am sharing a few of my projects here that features of fallen soldiers, just for the record.
For pity’s sake Gelson, don’t go down the route of self-basement before the Great God Woke. We all model representations of machines that dispense death and destruction - why should we be so angst-ridden we can’t tolerate a model, let’s be clear - a model for Pete’s sake - of a dead soldier?
Your modelling skills are second to none; don’t diminish yourself thus; it verges on the pathetic, and I take no pleasure in saying that.
If it does cause offence, then tough; don’t apolgise!
Furthermore, I suspect the make-up of modellers on this site is what? Around (roughly) 40% former servicemen? Hardly a bunch of shrinking violets.
I agree wholeheartedly with Brian. As long as it’s done with some restraint I think it’s fine.
Shep Paine once said something about this very subject in one of his books. He said something like don’t splatter blood and guts everywhere, I think a little goes a long way. It can be handled with care I feel as your pictures show.
Your dioramas are very tastefully done of a rather “distasteful” subject. I don’t think anyone really like to see “death & destruction”; however, as a military modeler it sort of comes with the territory. And like Ross mentioned, there is quite a bit of death depicted in classical art, and some of it can be really violent. Just take a walk through the Vatican!
Sadly my figure painting skills are so poor that even my “live” figures look more like dead ones! But I can see it is part of war, so shouldn’t be avoided if the diorama calls for it.
War is hell . . . your casualties are depicted with respectful discretion but more notably your figure painting is exceptional.
How do you portray a bloody conflict without displaying the effects of brutal aggression, the veiwer needs to be reminded of the cost of warfare.
This is a rather restrained depiction of death in war, so I think it is tasteful, gets the point across, withouit beating you over the head with it.
In real war, the casualties wouldn’t have neat bullet holes & a bit of blood; frequently it would include dismemberment, & frighteningly grievous wounds. I’m not necessarily advocating that (though it could be effective if it isn’t used gratuitously), but within the context, I don’t see these dios as being objectionable.
To me, it depends on the context. Showing the dead in war as in WW2 photos is reality. I think there is a line, at least with me, that is crossed when the killing is glorified. If you did a diorama of a hanging and you made a guy kicking and struggling while being strangled by the rope and the participants laughing, it would be offensive to me. Making a diorama of people holding someone down while their throat is being cut would be equally offensive. I watched a video made by ISIS. a guy in an orange jump suit was bound hands and feet. They forced him to the ground and took a T 55 and slowly crushed him starting at his feet and slowly moved up his body until his skull popped and his brain pitched about 2 feet away. A diorama of that would be offensive. A diorama of someone bound with a tire around his neck that was set on fire would be offensive. If the diorama is made for the shock value of death then it is probably offensive. If it shows death has occurred as in a war scene it is probably OK.
Sometimes you may want to be intentionally offensive to show an injustice that occurred. If you made a diorama of part of a concentration camp and you wanted to represent the horror that occurred, it could be very offensive but done as a way to make a never again statement.
Plus you never really know what is going to be the line for any particular person. If your purpose is to offend there are certainly venues for that and hopefully those who attend go in with the understanding of what they see. In a case such as shown here someone would have to be very sheltered and sensitive to be upset by all the men who have obviously passed out from a sleep gas attack.
I teach high school online from the same room I do my winter modeling in, and my German armor is on the shelves behind me for all the kids to see. My wife freaks out as she is worried someone might see that “certain symbol” and complain. I constantly have to reassure her none of the armor has that marking as my aircraft are in another room. Although I did have a Stug III with an aerial recognition flag on it, it was not visible from the student perspective and I made sure nothing of the sort was visible just in case. I even put my build photos online and shared it with students and staff but made sure nothing that would require me to engage in a lengthy explanation was visible.
I see no problem with it. Even if it was gratuitous, it would not bother me, but I can see where it would bother some people. But I agree with the sentiments of others here; if it bothers you, don’t look at it.
One point to consider: if you are putting it in a public display or contest, you should check if they have any rules about the subject.
Some sensitive souls might even react to figures carrying military weapons,
not to mention all those horrible machines of death and destruction (tanks ..).
Once upon a time a vegetarian/vegan was upset whe she saw the package
of minced meat at the top of my grocery shopping bag …
The only issue I have with displaying casualties is that, to me, they do not look “dead enough”, meaning they do not look collapsed enough. Dead bodies loose all muscular rigidity and become almost shapeless.
A Russian partisan ambush dio I did 9 years ago. I didn’t start out with gory intentions - I just shot the car up because it was such a bad kit, which then inspired (?) me to drastically revise my original intentions. I still could have just left it as an abandoned vehicle of course, but I’d already tired of seeing that kind of thing back then. Gratuitous? You be the judge.
Hi. Sad as it is / was, the subject needs to be modelled. Reality should include everything from refugees, destruction, damaged vehicles etc. Casualties are tragically part of it. Doing it well isn’t easy. I was given a superb diorama witha Russsian soldier standing over a dead cow, OMG the controversy - kids find it hard to deal with By all means educate everyone as best we can, otherwise it’s just ‘nice’ planes and the real reason they’re there is ignored.
By all means educate everyone as best we can, otherwise it’s just ‘nice’ planes and the real reason they’re there is ignored.