Splat: Comments
(most recent posts first)
splat
You ask what the above is... It's an artwork by the British artist John Isaacs, it's a sculpture he made in the mid 1990's. I think it is now owned by the British art collector Charles Saatchi. It's made of fibre-glass and is a life size representation of a grossly obese female who has fallen over and is unable to get up!
John
Tuesday, July 8, 2003 3:56 PM
On a recent trip to the USA, my daughter and I played a game called "Fat Count", scoring points for spotting grossly fat people. I think that Splat is probably an American.
Saturday, July 05, 2003 at 06:22:26
splat- This is just a real fat person laying down on the ground, I saw an old circus book with black and white photos of all the circus freaks over the past century and there where several pictures of huge fat people laying on beds and it looked exactly like the person (his body form) in this picture. Their fat just spreads out all around them.
Friday, July 04, 2003 at 01:54:50
Referring to the "splat hoax", it is a picture that Pink Floyd used back in the day. Ask Roger Waters about it.
Thursday, July 03, 2003 at 13:39:10
I once knew someone who had weighed well over 400 lbs. and through intense dieting and exercise (with a doctor's direction) had lost about half of that weight. After the weight loss, his stretched-out skin hung in "aprons" on the front and sides of his body. This excess skin had to be surgically removed. He was told that he could not regain the weight because his skin had been stretched out to its maximum. Strangely, before the surgery, he looked very much like the "subject" of the "Splat" photo you posted. If he were to have laid on his stomach, the excess flesh would have laid out to the sides exactly like depicted on the "person" in the photo. I believe that this is a real person, formerly very obese, who has lost a lot of weight. What they were doing collapsed on a sidewalk, in the nude, I'll never know and I don't want to guess. The details of the feet look very human. I don't think such detail would have been added to a rubber model. Perhaps the photo was edited to exaggerate the image somehow, but I see no immediately noticable evidence of photographic manipulation.
Thursday, July 03, 2003 at 10:33:30