Jump to content

Cemetery Art


Followers 2

Recommended Posts

On ‎2‎/‎7‎/‎2020 at 3:56 PM, lumbricus said:

 

@NW_history_buff If you don't have time, maybe @PISA-caching could finish the category? We should bring this to an end.

 

I think there isn't much left to do and I bet that NW_history_buff will do a better job on finishing the category, but of course I'm still prepared to do it, if NW_history_buff  wants me to.

Link to comment

UPDATE: I'm now officer for the category and able to edit it. I already made a few minor changes and am now looking for photos of gravestones that will NOT be accepted. I will visit one of our cemeteries to take photos of some examples. And I will also think about changes on the category description. So, any suggestions you may have will be appreciated.

 

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Alfouine said:

When i see examples, it's more artistics graves than cemetery art, if you expand we could submit beautiful graves inside churches or cathedrals

 

Good point. The initial idea was to create a category for all the artwork, that isn't allowed in the 'Figurative Public Sculpture' category. They exclude "Funerary sculptures", but "a figurative sculpture that is independent of a tomb found in a cemetery" would be accepted in that category. I added some text to also allow artwork on graves outside a cemetery. 

 

Any further feedback?

Link to comment
15 hours ago, T0SHEA said:

Why require the country in the title? Most generally, after sometime, I have noticed some approved submissions lacking the country in the title that require it.

So, if you are not going to be consistent, what is the point?

 

I changed that to "state/province/country".

 

15 hours ago, T0SHEA said:

"They" meaning Figurative Public Sculpture category, are you allowing cross posting?

 

The initial idea was to have a category for the artwork that isn't allowed in the 'Figurative Public Sculpture' category. So, cross posting with this category should not be allowed.

 

7 hours ago, T0SHEA said:

I thought the category was "Cemetery Art".

Or is it Cemetery, churches,  cathedrals art?  (associated with a grave)

 

How about pet cemeteries, parks where there is a grave, or where else there may be a grave with a beautiful sculpture?

 

You asked for feedback, my questions are not answered yet. Or is this FMO?

 

I think we should rename the category to "Funerary Art" (but will discuss that with the leader and officers) and make it clear that every artwork on a grave/tombstone is allowed, no matter if it is on a cemetery, in a cathedral, in a forrest or wherever. I still expect that the vast majority of submissions will be within a cemetery, but it's better to change the category name now to avoid misunderstandings. And although I don't expect too many submissions of artwork on a pets grave, I would also allow these.

 

After looking up what "FMO" means (my mother tongue is German and I don't know every English abbreviation that is out there) the answer is "no". It isn't FMO (for members only). I'm looking for input from whoever is interested in that category. The more opinions we hear, the more chances the category will have in Peer Review.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, T0SHEA said:

 

From category description:

Please name your waymark this way:
Name of the Artwork - town/state/country

Examples:
Stone Angel – New York, NY
Wooden Bird – Frankfurt, Germany
Mosaic Cross – Prague, Czech Republic

 

I changed that to "state/province/country".

I suggest:

Town, State/Province (Country is optional)

 

 

 

If country would be optional, the waymarks in my hometown would end with "Vienna, Vienna" because Vienna is a town and also one of the 9 Austrian federal states. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I don't like the idea to have the country optional.

 

Ecxept for the few countries where we can expect that almost everyone knows which country the province or state belongs to. That is the US and Canada in my opinion, maybe Australia.

 

But for the rest, the country should be required, more than the state, that often does not add that much information to the title for anybody but locals.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
20 minutes ago, fi67 said:

I don't like the idea to have the country optional.

 

Ecxept for the few countries where we can expect that almost everyone knows which country the province or state belongs to. That is the US and Canada in my opinion, maybe Australia.

 

But for the rest, the country should be required, more than the state, that often does not add that much information to the title for anybody but locals.

 

 

 

Exactly what I was trying to say. Or does anybody know where "Silves, Faro" would be (without asking Google Maps)? :-)

Edited by PISA-caching
Link to comment

Maybe I'm not good at expressing my thoughts, but I will try once more. The category 'Figurative Public Sculpture" doesn't allow sculptures on graves, but does allow other sculptures within a cemetery. So, the main purpose of the new category was and still is to enable waymarkers to post artwork on graves (within or outside cemeteries). And from a reviewers point of view, it is quite easy to see whether the artwork is on a grave or not connected to a grave, but somewhere on a cemetery. Therefore, I think that we should exclude everything that isn't connected with a grave/tombstone. I mean, IF we would allow figurative sculptures within a cemetery that are not connected to a grave, we would also have to allow Artistic Seatings within a cemetery, no? Therefore, I really think that "Funerary Art" will be a much better name for the category.

 

The next question is/was: Should we exclude bears, lions, dogs, religious figures etc.? And I think that we shouldn't do that, 1. because there will only few artwork remain valid and 2. it will be much more difficult for the reviewers. 

 

That's my point of view, but I'm open for further opinions. So, all you out there, make yourself heard and don't wait for the Peer Review. :)

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

This proposal began on April 29, 2013, restarted in July 2017, and again February 2020.

That is 6 years, 9 months, 29 days including today. I encourage everyone to go back and read the entire thread, the same objections were discussed in 2013 and 2017 that are still being discussed.

 

I think if this category has not made it to peer review in ALMOST 7 YEARS, "Houston, we have a problem"

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by T0SHEA
Link to comment
3 hours ago, PISA-caching said:

Maybe I'm not good at expressing my thoughts, but I will try once more. The category 'Figurative Public Sculpture" doesn't allow sculptures on graves, but does allow other sculptures within a cemetery. So, the main purpose of the new category was and still is to enable waymarkers to post artwork on graves (within or outside cemeteries). And from a reviewers point of view, it is quite easy to see whether the artwork is on a grave or not connected to a grave, but somewhere on a cemetery. Therefore, I think that we should exclude everything that isn't connected with a grave/tombstone. I mean, IF we would allow figurative sculptures within a cemetery that are not connected to a grave, we would also have to allow Artistic Seatings within a cemetery, no? Therefore, I really think that "Funerary Art" will be a much better name for the category.

 

The next question is/was: Should we exclude bears, lions, dogs, religious figures etc.? And I think that we shouldn't do that, 1. because there will only few artwork remain valid and 2. it will be much more difficult for the reviewers. 

 

That's my point of view, but I'm open for further opinions. So, all you out there, make yourself heard and don't wait for the Peer Review. :)

 

So let's change the category name to "Funerary Art" and we exclude nothing. If it is unique artwork and connected with a grave/tombstone it's fine. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment

I believe that Andreas has it nailed down well enough that the category now may be submitted to peer review. His latter explanations of acceptable versus non acceptable submissions would/should satisfy the vast majority of cases.

 

As we all well know, no one will ever manage to initially encompass the entire universe of submissions which may flood forth.

Keith

Edited by ScroogieII
Link to comment

Andreas and I began discussing this a couple of days ago since Fig excludes Funerary Art (if the sculpture is part of a tombstone - not a freestanding piece which is acceptable in Fig.). I had been approving them in Fig since they did not have a home anywhere else. If the members prefer, I could just remove this exclusion from Fig and no new category is needed. Or we can create a new category. Whatever the membership prefers.

 

Take care,

Outspoken1 (sandy)

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

I would prefer a new category. Mixing them together isn't a good idea in my opinion. Figurative Public Sculptures have now almost 10.000+ sculptures and we will get many many from cemeteries. It's a difference if they are located on a cemetery or in the "normal" public ground, but I'm open for a discussion. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Per member input, we will work to create a new (actually completed, since the category was proposed years ago!) category for Funerary Art. I will NOT modify Figurative to accept Funerary Art (which would be part of a tomb - freestanding sculptures NOT related to a tomb/headstone would still be approved). Those that were previously approved in Fig would either be grandfathered or can be moved to the new category - as the Waymarker prefers. I have an unexpected sick dog, so I have been off the Forums for a couple of days. We will work on the Funerary category incorporating members suggestions/guidance to create a proposal for the membership and Groundspeak.

 

Take care, Outspoken1 (Sandy)

Link to comment

I have just read all of the posts on this Forum (does not mean I remember everything that was said, but to get a feel for where the membership is going). I have sent an email to most of the members who have posted on the category asking for input about the Funerary Art category. To clarify, Figurative does accept freestanding sculptures that are not part of a tomb. I had been accepting some of the outstanding pieces that were part of a tomb because there was no where to put them. We are working on the category this weekend, but it does take a bit of time to create a clear category without too much confusion. And there is such variety in the world, it is hard to write a category that includes (and/or excludes) examples of the content of the category (speaking in a general sense of all Waymark categories). So lets take a little bit of time to nail down specifics instead of rushing a category to vote that is too much of a jumble of requirements.

 

Thank you so much for your input. Outspoken1 (Sandy)

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Outspoken1 said:

So lets take a little bit of time to nail down specifics instead of rushing a category to vote that is too much of a jumble of requirements.

From  Monday, April 29, 2013 To Friday, July 30, 2021

Result: 3,015 days
Or 8 years, 3 months, 2 days.

Or 99 months, 2 days 

  • Surprised 1
Link to comment

Yes, the category was initially proposed 99 months and 2 days ago. That is exactly the reason it needs to be reviewed and revised. As with any other hobby, especially one such as Waymarking that uses technology, proposals need to be updated to meet the current needs of the hobby (Waymarking). Remember when cell phone photos were not accepted because of the poor quality of cell phone cameras? Now cell phone cameras take excellent photos! Remember when the requirement to log a visit was to take a photo of yourself with your GPSr? I have not used my GPSr in years! Remember when it Waymarking used the honor system that the person had personally visited the Waymark. Then a small number of Waymarkers were using Google Street View to create and/or visit Waymarks, so we had to add the requirement that one must "personally visit the Waymark." Yes, things change and we need time to do this right. We have been working on this category revision for 4 days. Please breathe!!

 

Poster I used to have in my office --"Why is there never enough time to do it right but always enough time to do it over?"

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

OK, so I am working up preliminary areas where Funerary Art could be found. Up front I will say I am not religious, so I have not been raised in any religious tradition (calm down, I am not going to talk about religion). Therefore, I am not familiar at what types of tombs/stones/art on final resting places would be found in places of worship. Most of the locations I am finding are related to Christian churches and burial traditions. If anyone can help with other religions/burial traditions, I would be quite grateful. Remember, the reason this category is getting up and rolling is that Figurative does not accept Funerary Sculptures. We are not trying to create a redundant category and there are many categories that deal with markers for the deceased. The thrust of the category is funerary art, not final resting places or type of monument for the deceased.

 

This category recognizes that most of the sculptures would be found in a cemetery. However, there are other burial locations that may include sculptures that are funerary in nature, such as churches, cathedrals (bigger church), mausoleums and some burial locations that were owned by the deceased (family burial locations). Are there other locations common in other faiths/burial traditions I am missing? (Help please.) Any comments/thoughts on what should/shouldn't be accepted and why.

 

Here are some locations where Funerary Art could be found. Should the category accept/decline from these various locations and styles of burial for the deceased: 

Sculpture/Artwork found on a headstone, columbarium, crypt, tombstone, mausoleum, ledger grave marker, cenotaph, tomb, effigies, church monument, cadaver monument, .... ? I know some of these have their own categories. Any of these that are related to s specific burial of an individual would not be accepted in Figurative. Figurative only accepts monuments that are, in essence, honoring all the deceased. Figurative does not accept pieces of a specific ('known") individual--that goes in Statues of Historic/Religious Figures. Just looking for comments/thoughts on what should/shouldn't be accepted and why.

 

Existing Waymark Categories (I probably missed some) that need to be considered to be included/excluded:

 

Death Mask Gravestones
Broken Column Headstones
Occupational/Hobby Grave Stones
Woodmen of the World Grave Markers/Monuments
Headstones of Centenarians
**Veteran Memorials (Many categories - Specific wars and general categories)
Homemade Tombstones
Graves Mentioning a Cause of Death
Out of Place Graves
Statues of Historic Figures
Statues of Religious Figures

Dead Poets Society
Zinc Headstones
Mausoleum
Relief Art (I am contacting Relief Art to verify if they accept/reject relief funerary art)
Figurative Public Sculpture
Sphinx Sculptures
Equestrian Statues
Epic Beings
Lions, Bears, ...
Pet Cemeteries

(**There are many categories that honor the resting places of Veterans. For my convenience, I am grouping them into this overall term.)

 

I am not against cross-posting and NOT suggesting all the above should be excluded. Remember the goal of this category is to highlight the art of the memorial - not the final resting place of the deceased.

 

Members are concerned about the premise of the "Wow" factor as to what the category is wishing for. There is concern that the criteria may be too subjective (though there are many categories with 'wow' factor, this is not new). The reason for that idea of "Wow" is that,  for instance, there are many headstones with little lambs (for the tragic loss of a child), or fingers pointing upwards, etc. Would a size criteria help (ex., roughly over 3 ft/1m square)? The piece must not be mass produced-it need to be a unique piece. How would members like to see this phrased/defined?

 

Please don't get bogged down in format for title, etc. Right now, we need to best define what the category is trying to highlight and thus clearly define the types of sculptures/art the category is looking for. And I know there are always exceptions when a Waymarker finds something so magnificent we did not anticipate that.

 

Again, I am just thinking aloud and looking for input. Please don't shoot the writer [grin].

 

Take care, Outspoken1 (Sandy)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

My opinion? Let's talk about extremes. If we (theoretically!) excluded all the categories mentioned above, I don't know if I will ever find a waymark for this category. If we include all of them, we will have a lot of crosspostings, but we will also have a category with a lot of fine art on a grave and won't miss any great pieces of art, just because it also represents his/her hobby/occupation or the deceased is a Dead Poet. So, I guess we need something in between.

 

Maybe we should think about it that way: Is the category to be ex- or included also an art category or not? For example: One of my Out of Place Graves is a wonderful piece of art (in my humble opinion). Not sure, if it will create a "wow" for everyone, but let's just pretend that it does. Would you post that one in "Out of Place Graves" or "Funerary Art"? One is an art category, and the other lists graves that are not on a cemetery (artful or not). IMHO there is no reason for preventing a crossposting in that situation. I would understand, if a grave artwork was posted in two different art categories. F.e. "Funerary Art" and "Relief Art Sculptures". In the bottom of my heart I would even allow crossposting in 2 art categories, but that is most likely just my opinion.

 

What I really would like to clarify: Are we talking about "figurative" art to compensate, what the Figurative Public Sculpture category denies (= animals and humans) or are we also considering f.e. abstract art? I posted a photo of the grave of Hedy Lamarr in this thread on July 28, 2017, but received no feedback.

 

PS: Don't worry, I won't shoot you. I don't even own a gun. ^_^

Edited by PISA-caching
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment

Again, I did NOT say all those categories should be excluded. I wanted input as to include/exclude. I prefer an inclusive category. As I wrote above, I am not against cross posting. I also support any type of art - figurative and abstract. But I want input from others so we understand what we want the category to accomplish. Thak you so much for your comments and guidance!

 

Take care, Outspoken1 (Sandy)

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Outspoken1 said:

Again, I did NOT say all those categories should be excluded. I wanted input as to include/exclude. I prefer an inclusive category. As I wrote above, I am not against cross posting. I also support any type of art - figurative and abstract. But I want input from others so we understand what we want the category to accomplish. Thak you so much for your comments and guidance!

 

Take care, Outspoken1 (Sandy)

My take - make it true Funerary art - that is, it must be part of a headstone or grave marker.  I can tell you that the Veterans Memorials , both Specific and non-specific are now out of the picture as they specifically exclude headstones.  Woodmen markers, as a general rule, should be denied as most were mass produced tree trunk style markers (there were other tree trunk style markers sold by Sears through the catalogue, another story.)  A lot of late 19th and early 20th Century headstones had very shallow, mass produced, relief art put into the stones - hands pointing up, hands shaking, pearly gates opening, etc.  These probably should be denied - otherwise your category is just going to be overwhelmed with the mundane. Broken Columns are usually pretty austere and devoid of decoration - this reflects the fact that the column is demonstrating a life cut short before it had reached its full potential.  My concern is that officers in this category are just not going to have the knowledge of what is mass produced and what is actually unique,  It takes time and walking lots of cemeteries to gain that kind of knowledge...

Other categories such as dead poets, graves mentioning cause of death, and other headstone categories should not be a concern.  There will be some cross-over, however, not every dead poet grave or other headstone category headstone will fit here - far from it.  

 

  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
15 hours ago, Outspoken1 said:

Again, I did NOT say all those categories should be excluded...

 

That's why I wrote "(theoretically!)". ;)

 

14 hours ago, iconions said:

... Broken Columns are usually pretty austere and devoid of decoration ...

 

As you said, "usually". There are exceptions though: https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmMJHE and the category should say, if and under which circumstances these exceptions will also be approved. 

Link to comment
8 hours ago, PISA-caching said:

 

That's why I wrote "(theoretically!)". ;)

 

 

As you said, "usually". There are exceptions though: https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmMJHE and the category should say, if and under which circumstances these exceptions will also be approved. 

Again, that is exactly why I wrote what I wrote.  The deal breaker with cross posting is if ALL of one type of waymark is going to go into the new category,  As is being demonstrated so far as I can see, this is not the case.  Of course, I always reserve final judgement until I see the real mockup of the category description - so far, we are still dealing with caviar wishes and Champaign dreams...  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

WOW!

I had been skipping over this thread for quite some time, but decided to delve in today. I simply had no idea such a seemingly simple and effectively narrow a category as this could contain so many possibilities for both inclusion and exclusion, but that's how the gravestone crumbles.

 

Your list of potential exclusions is quite complete (I haven't checked it for completeness) and, having once again examined it, I believe I would agree with the exclusion of the complete list. Even if the "WOW" factor were to be a substantial factor in your decision making as an officer, I would advise against invoking it, purely for the "subjective" factor. That, in all likelihood, would only bring you grief. The less subjective you allow decisions to be, the better you'll sleep.

 

On the side of specific exclusions, just my briefly considered opinion:

Broken columns - regardless of the imagery of a broken column, it has a home.

Lamb headstones - unfortunately WAAAY too prevalent - I doubt you are aiming at a category of Lamb Headstones.

 

On the side of inclusion, again just my briefly considered opinion:

Angels - I'm aware of the Angel of Hope Statues category, but they are beautiful works of art, so I wouldn't exclude them out of hand.

Angels - I'm quite sure we've seen other angels, not Angel of Hope Statues, so I know they exist.

 

Beyond that, your category, if we were to consider my exclusions as fact (again, an opinion only) your proposed category has quickly become much less unwieldy.

 

On 7/31/2021 at 1:18 PM, Outspoken1 said:

headstone, columbarium, crypt, tombstone, mausoleum, ledger grave marker, cenotaph, tomb, effigies, church monument, cadaver monument

 

Here, you've covered pretty much everything i can think of.

 

I'm quite sure that I am even less religious than yourself, so I'm unable to offer any assistance with non Christian religions, or even Christian rites and mores, for that matter. I expect it's time now for a perusal of the category requirements, should they exist - hint, hint.

 

Question now - must an artwork be physically attached to the monumental piece, mausoleum, tomb, etc., or may it simply lie within the burial plot/location of the deceased?

 

Keith

  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
On 8/3/2021 at 9:10 PM, ScroogieII said:

Question now - must an artwork be physically attached to the monumental piece, mausoleum, tomb, etc., or may it simply lie within the burial plot/location of the deceased?

 

Keith

 That is an interesting point. Here is the issue. Figurative allows sculptures in a cemetery as long as it is NOT part of a tomb. In other words, a generic angel to all who have passed versus and angel on John Doe's tomb to honor John Doe. I offered to just delete that exclusion from Fig, but the respondents thought a specific category would be better. (Who does not like a new category [grin!]) So if the piece was lying within the plot to mainly honor the deceased or the deceased's family (multi-generational/family plot), then it could not go in Fig. But if it was to honor all deceased as a general statement of commiseration for all deceased everywhere, then it could go in Fig. Phew! Did I clear that up of make it worse?

 

Again, the list of possible exclude/include categories was just for comment -- it is NOT a list of all categories to be excluded.

 

Take care, Outspoken1 (Sandy)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Outspoken1 said:

I offered to just delete that exclusion from Fig,

 

Why a new category, when you have suggested twice to expand Figurative Sculptures. 

 

I quote <snip> "Categories should work on being more inclusive of new additions which might fit into their missions rather than go off in a different tangent with a new category 'to fill a new icon for their collection.'"

Link to comment

The focus in the new category "Funerary Art" lies on special art on tombs/graves, not just figurative sculptures. So this is not solved if we allow just sculptures on tombs in the Figurative Public Sculpture category. This has nothing to do with collecting a new icon.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, lumbricus said:

This has nothing to do with collecting a new icon.

 

3 hours ago, T0SHEA said:

I quote <snip> "Categories should work on being more inclusive of new additions which might fit into their missions rather than go off in a different tangent with a new category 'to fill a new icon for their collection.'"

 

Don't shoot the messenger. :)

This is a direct quote! As stated, " I quote <snip> "

I did not originally post this, I just copied and quoted it.

Link to comment

As the leader of this potential category who took over the role from lumbricus, the vision and emphasis is to create a home for those works of funerary art that wouldn't be accepted in the myriad of other existing categories, through whatever reasons. Most, if not all other categories in question, have the potential to include funerary art but don't for whatever reasons (leaders/officers don't want to make an amendment to their categories, inactive officers in categories don't respond to messages, etc.). I'd like to think of funerary art much like I do of the Dated Architectural Structures Multifarious category It's a dedicated, last-resort repository for beautiful and eye-catching works of art that would be rejected anywhere else in the Waymarking community but would have a home in this category. 

 

Outspoken1 and I are collaborating together on the fine-tuning of the category details. We agree on most aspects but disagree on one argument, that being how inclusive/exclusive we want this category to be. I've adopted a more exclusive 'vision' for this category since I don't personally want it to be a category that could also be cross posted into a number of other categories. I've started putting together a growing list of excluded categories in the category description much like I did with the Dated Architectural Structures Multifarious category. For example, Woodmen of the World and zinc headstones have their own respective categories, and although a small number of them possess a 'wow' factor, wouldn't be accepted in Funerary Art. 

 

It should also be mentioned that there are a good number of cemetery works of art around the world that aren't figurative in nature, as I've come across dozens of photos that argue that point but possess other 'wow' factors. I'm in the process of putting together photo collages of funerary art for the category description that would qualify and photos of art that wouldn't qualify by either being too mainstream, mass-produced or not possessing enough of a 'wow' factor. Outpoken1 pointed out to me recently that a large work of funerary art shouldn't be the determining factor in whether it deserves inclusion in the category. I agree. I've seen some amazing photo examples of cemetery works of art that aren't substantial in size but definitely possess a 'wow' factor. I hope to be able to provide examples of what constitutes a 'wow' work of art compared to other less appealing works of art.

 

Another argument I have is to possibly limit the number of individual funerary art submissions in a particular cemetery to possibly the top five works they encounter (much like the Woodmen of the World category). Why, you ask? Well, I've come across many cemetery landscape photos online of headstones of funerary art that would technically qualify in the dozens in one cemetery. Including this limitation to the top five funerary works of art would encourage waymarkers to narrow down the options to their five favorite works of art as well as allow other waymarkers to contribute from the same cemetery. 

 

I welcome comments and suggestions from the community.

 

:cool:

Link to comment
3 hours ago, NW_history_buff said:

As the leader of this potential category who took over the role from lumbricus, the vision and emphasis is to create a home for those works of funerary art that wouldn't be accepted in the myriad of other existing categories, through whatever reasons. Most, if not all other categories in question, have the potential to include funerary art but don't for whatever reasons (leaders/officers don't want to make an amendment to their categories, inactive officers in categories don't respond to messages, etc.). I'd like to think of funerary art much like I do of the Dated Architectural Structures Multifarious category It's a dedicated, last-resort repository for beautiful and eye-catching works of art that would be rejected anywhere else in the Waymarking community but would have a home in this category. 

 

Outspoken1 and I are collaborating together on the fine-tuning of the category details. We agree on most aspects but disagree on one argument, that being how inclusive/exclusive we want this category to be. I've adopted a more exclusive 'vision' for this category since I don't personally want it to be a category that could also be cross posted into a number of other categories. I've started putting together a growing list of excluded categories in the category description much like I did with the Dated Architectural Structures Multifarious category. For example, Woodmen of the World and zinc headstones have their own respective categories, and although a small number of them possess a 'wow' factor, wouldn't be accepted in Funerary Art. 

 

It should also be mentioned that there are a good number of cemetery works of art around the world that aren't figurative in nature, as I've come across dozens of photos that argue that point but possess other 'wow' factors. I'm in the process of putting together photo collages of funerary art for the category description that would qualify and photos of art that wouldn't qualify by either being too mainstream, mass-produced or not possessing enough of a 'wow' factor. Outpoken1 pointed out to me recently that a large work of funerary art shouldn't be the determining factor in whether it deserves inclusion in the category. I agree. I've seen some amazing photo examples of cemetery works of art that aren't substantial in size but definitely possess a 'wow' factor. I hope to be able to provide examples of what constitutes a 'wow' work of art compared to other less appealing works of art.

 

Another argument I have is to possibly limit the number of individual funerary art submissions in a particular cemetery to possibly the top five works they encounter (much like the Woodmen of the World category). Why, you ask? Well, I've come across many cemetery landscape photos online of headstones of funerary art that would technically qualify in the dozens in one cemetery. Including this limitation to the top five funerary works of art would encourage waymarkers to narrow down the options to their five favorite works of art as well as allow other waymarkers to contribute from the same cemetery. 

 

I welcome comments and suggestions from the community.

 

:cool:

I've only come across a couple of zincs that I would say have the "Wow" - this being the most impressive: https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmDDGN_J_E_Barrow_Mt_Mora_Cemetery_St_Joseph_Mo
I like the idea of limiting submissions - I know in Bellfountaine Cemetery in St. Louis there are some spectacular examples that I can't wait to load into the category....
I hope we can see a proposed description before peer review....

Link to comment

Well, I doubt that my opinion will change anything, but I'm not a fan of limiting the submissions per cemetery (at least not without taking the size of the cemetery into consideration). Here in Vienna, we have the "Zentalfriedhof", which has about 330,000 graves and this makes it one of the largest cemeteries in the world. I know a few candidates for this category, f.e. https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmWEF4, and I am sure that there are more than 5 graves with a "wow" effect, but once I have found 5 of them, I will be finished there and I will definitely not walk across the entire cemetery (which would not take hours, but days!), take photos of all the graves that I think would qualify and then create only the best 5 WMs. Besides: Right now I'm the only waymarker posting in Vienna, so even if other waymarkers could post 5 more, it will not happen soon.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...