Captain Dee

Man, this Scarlet O'Ha- sorry, Magnolia dude really gets around. Very neat, clean build. The cell doors are superb and the posing (especially the crumpled skeleton) is nice. I also like the torches despite being such a simple design. But perhaps the best part is just the idea itself. Good work!

The overall scene is nice but I really like the tower. I also think the green corners look great with the tan walls and the wooden part halfway up. The bastion with its angled walls is excellent and the bridge is pretty good. And you definitely crammed in the minifigs. Good work!

Busted! Neat little scene. All the different poses are nice and the expressions are perfect. They're really sweating it. The 2013 dragon knight doesn't look half bad as a musician. Good work!

I don't have a problem with the concept of Lego as an art form - I just don't usually view it that way. This particular depiction was obviously created to be a form of art so it's difficult to ignore. I build for face value but everyone is free to do otherwise.

Well, you've done it. Again. Excellent depiction! For such a simple base the parade looks superb. The architecture is nice too and the entire scene is composed well. There are too many details to mention, and the photostream was great for viewing everything. I like how you included material from your previous builds. It seems Admiral Woodhouse is in the midst of an identity crisis - either that or else he needs to see a doctor, pronto. Ol' Blockhead Squarepants looks lost, the poor kid... And who knew Victoria's Secret existed back in the day?? Very creative work and I like the long arrangement!

The first with the knight is superb. I'm not familiar with the subject but the scene looks great jammed with all those details. The mushrooms and olive green provide a nice break from the standard green. Good work!

The exterior still looks about the same (which is good) but the interior is excellent. There are too many details to take in at once. It looks more homey and appealing than the original and the inclusion of the dwarves really brings it to life. And the tree is superb. Good work!

I agree - that torso and legs are good for more than just a king. They can work well for something like this, they've been used to depict Sir Francis Drake, and I think they'd make a good Columbus. Nice little setting.

My prior statements have generally been defensive of the concept of posting material such as this but I have largely ignored the issue of artistic expression. I have never really appreciated Lego as an art form; I enjoy studying history and I especially like viewing realistic historic Lego depictions. But I don't usually view these depictions as "art" even if it was the builder's intention. This depiction is reasonably realistic and I like it as such (even though the subject itself is historically troubling) but I don't view it through the lens of "art." I think most of the differences regarding art expressed in this conversation can be condensed into one simple phrase: real versus abstract. I prefer realism. It is indeed a form of art, but a very literal, rigid, predetermined form with little room for interpretation. Realism generally provokes a very predictable reaction. It relies less on the artist's creative intellect and more on his creative abilities. It usually doesn't challenge the viewer to ponder the meaning because the meaning is freely expressed. For this reason some art critics refer to realism as a "lower" form of art. Abstract art is decidedly less realistic if it is realistic at all (think modern art). It isn't bound by literal, defined constraints but is instead open to any form the artist wishes to employ. Because it lacks recognizable definition it may evoke a wide range of unpredictable reactions, and this cognitive stimulus is often recognized as a "higher" form of art. Abstract art is to physical expressions the way free verse is to poetry: loosely defined if at all, leaving the artist free to explore. So which form is better - or even correct? That ultimately must be left to the viewer to decide. I've already stated my preference. Notaromantic accuses the depiction of being "too literal" and for failing to adequately portray itself - and I agree totally from an abstract point of view. Without regard for our respective viewpoints - real and abstract - one might think that we, the viewers, deeply disagree. But with regard to our personal positions I think both views are correct. The depiction is reasonably accurate (realistic) which satisfies people like myself while leaving wanting those who prefer the greater depth of expression and interpretation afforded by an abstract (less realistic) form. Then there are other personal positions beyond art to consider. Jreacher expressed distaste for depictions of this nature based on his experience as a veteran. I can't argue against that; different people have different sensitivities and one is not necessarily right or wrong. I recommended a disclaimer of sorts to protect the builder due to the fact that racism and hatred are depicted. Generally art need not be explained or defended by its creator, even when the subject is controversial or offensive, but again - race requires a softer touch. A sentence or two could easily serve this purpose without negatively influencing the interpretation by the viewer. Overall this has been a very interesting conversation, and I applaud everyone for being so courteous and polite. I often find anonymous discussions like this on other sites to be vulgar and crude with their hurled insults and profanity. Mature conversations such as this are one of the nicer attributes of Eurobricks! I wasn't going to leave another comment on this topic but notaromantic's well-written reply compelled me to consider the source of our different views. You'll never be accused of being notanartcritic, and I assume you would prefer a more abstract form. The Klansmen are just difficult to portray accurately; the ghost makes a good mask and robe which conceal the form beneath while lacking the correct color or point on the hat, and the white hat/printed head combo doesn't truly conceal the head and provides no robe. It's a tradeoff. From an abstract perspective you are correct in stating that solid white and black minifigures without any other form express the concept well. Ultimately we don't all think alike. If we did I doubt if art would serve any purpose.

I knew when I used the word "silly" I would prompt some kind of response! Actually purple can be beautiful (CMF princess) and you are correct in stating that it was generally expensive. I don't think this is really off topic; it's just a rare viewpoint that is usually overwhelmed by the strong "Red vs Blue" debate.

I like purple for things that should be purple. An actual "purple coat" would look silly and I mentioned it only because of your example and the fact that I like both red and blue. Regarding my collection of officers, consider this: I'm a very narrow-minded builder and my overall collection is likewise "narrow" in the sense that I only buy what I can use and the parts list is therefore highly specialized. Pirates is my only significant theme, so it's easier to do versus building in lots of different themes. And I'm on the lookout for more than the 50 I already have!

MiloNelsiano, I agree with you to a point. If TheBrickAvenger had included the entire lengthy reply as part of the original post, then obviously most of the rest of this conversation never would have happened. I was thinking of a simple statement, not more than a few sentences, which should serve to minimize the most negative and critical reactions. This type subject matter will always provoke a response, with or without a personal position on the matter, but I find it troubling when people rush to judge the creator rather than simply analyzing the work itself. That's what I was suggesting he could avoid while still leaving room for discussion of the actual subject. I'm confident that stating one's basic position wouldn't stifle the conversation.

Regarding scenes in sequence - well, yes, duh. I didn't say what I meant and made myself sound kinda foolish. Allow me to elaborate: I meant that the two individual builds look so similar - yours being such a good copy - that at a glance it looks like one person posted two different scenes using the same setting. Obviously a closer look reveals some differences, but that's the best copycat design I've ever seen. Credit the first for being an excellent build and yours for being an equally impressive remake. I meant it as a compliment. Good work, both of you.

Hmm. Questions, questions. I've never had a strong preference - I like them all. Blue has always been my favorite color but I like both the old and new versions of the Imperial Soldiers and Guards. The new navy blue admiral/governor torso is beautiful, and the 2009 admiral torso was pretty good too. The Armada is more specialized and would be my last choice of the three, but I still like the faction and the few minifigs I have of them. I, too, could be a "purple coat" (man that sounds funny). But if I had to pick just one I would say redcoats, specifically the King George's Officer from POTC. I know that isn't an option in this poll (well, not directly) but it is a redcoat even if it is licensed instead of System. I just really like that torso design, and I have exactly 50 of the complete minifigs to prove it.

Nice room! Looks like it's been lived in... I can't single out one favorite item so I'll give you a list. The telescope, rug, toy train, jack-in-the-box, posters/drawings, and shuttle are all very good. And I really like the box of Lego bricks. How appropriate! Really, the entire setting is wonderful and I like how you've managed to include such a wide variety of details, like the road sign, treasure map, trooper helmet, arabian lamp, basketball etc. Excellent work as always!

Good explanation - and good judgement in waiting to post your own reply. I've been supportive of the concept from the beginning, but I would still like to offer one small bit of advice: if you build another uncomfortable or controversial depiction, it just might be helpful to offer your personal position on the matter when you first post it. This should eliminate questions regarding your intentions or purpose and likewise minimize criticism of both you and the subject matter. Don't assume that everyone will understand your purpose! You're a brave soul for doing this and I support your efforts within the proper context.

The design of your leaning tower is excellent. I also think the colors are a bit abrupt and would look better with smaller parts (like plates) to improve the transition from one to another but I understand if parts are limited. Nice concept!

I'm not much on pop culture so I appreciate your reference to the Colossus of Rhodes - and that's how I think of it. This is an amazing creation. I don't usually care for large-scale builds but this is excellent and could still be used in a minifig-scale scene in its historic context. The different components - the helmet, shield, skirt, arms and legs, etc - are designed and built really well. The broken sword just looks perfect. I wondered about transport and suspected you built with that in mind. I'm sure it will be a hit at future shows. Superb work!

I think everyone naturally has a negative initial reaction - and anyone who doesn't is probably a psycho. It's just a natural reaction to the irrational, sadistic hatred that fueled those violent acts. The perpetrators' reasons were numerous, but hatred was always the root, and as we still see to this day, hatred provokes powerful reactions. But Martin Luther King, Jr. knew that fighting fire with fire wasn't the answer, and neither is powerful backlash against this depiction the best way to address it. This topic was briefly locked yesterday - and then unlocked, which makes me think the powers that be must have discussed it themselves before reaching a final decision. Censorship seems too aggressive and limiting, especially considering the polite conversation we've been having - and I suspect it's the reason the topic was unlocked. I commend whoever made that final decision. Blufiji, I'm glad you spoke up. I agree fully with your response (I also thought about Gary's battle scene) but I'm especially glad to hear from an African-American. You certainly lend a valuable viewpoint, even if everyone doesn't agree with you. One more point: the ghosts as Klansmen. What's all the fuss about? I looked up several old photos and I'm convinced the ghost pieces make the best depiction of the white robes and pointy masks of the official Klan uniform from the 1920s (when it was standardized). TheBrickAvenger obviously wanted to create an accurate depiction - and I think he did the best possible. I can't come up with any other combination of parts that comes close. Sure it's uncomfortable - because it's reasonably accurate. A solid white minifigure wouldn't look realistic and, crucially, wouldn't provoke the necessary response.

This is a nice, quiet setting that matches the title well. The rocks look great and I like the way the path and stream both curve around them. The plants look lovely as well and while the house is well-built, it does look a little precarious perched on the outward-leaning edge. Good work overall.

Mister Phes, thanks for your prompt reply. I guess when I spoke of archive organization I was referring to the fact that it was divided into sections for Ships, Land Based, Imperial Guards, etc. which made it somewhat easy to navigate. Also, the chronologic order was sometimes helpful but not always necessary. I look foward to seeing the final product - and perhaps I can offer something "blazing" of my own!

I see I'm not the only one revisiting this subject. I respectfully disagree with Jreacher regarding the description. While I think the poem is offensive in nature I realize it is historic - good or bad - and with no description whatsoever I just might have concluded that TheBrickAvenger is a raging, skin-head, neo-Nazi, KKK-wannabe white supremacist (and maybe he is - but I doubt it). I also find the idea that "Lego should be... kept out of such histories" a bit troubling. Obviously racism is a problem by itself. And it seems obvious to me that violence is a problem by itself. Yet countless murders and other brutal atrocities have been posted elsewhere on Eurobricks and no one blinks an eye - until race plays a role. Why? Because we as a society accept violent depictions (real or especially imagined) even though we claim to abhorr violence in real settings besides war. It's getting complicated, right? Unfortunately history is one long violent story and studying it means we will necessarily be exposed to many uncomfortable or offensive situations. The fact is, I generally find ALL violent depictions to be fundamentally offensive (I hinted at this in my previous post) but involving racism really takes it to another level. But I can't condemn the depiction entirely because it was real. If Lego should be kept free of such depictions I could add plenty more off-limits subject matter to the list. How about the World Wars? Both involved ethnic conflict. How about the American Civil War? Race played a central role. How about the Wild West? Just ask the natives. How about the Medieval Age, or the Age of Exploration, or the Colonial Age? All include violent acts against targeted ethnic groups. But these are all popular topics - both in Lego and other media. I think any respectful, educational depiction of historic events should be accepted - while glorification of offensive acts (whatever they may be) should be unacceptable, period. I understand racism is a problem, but I also understand violence is another problem. The difference in how we react is simply political correctness, which quickly becomes unreasonable when taken to extremes. I don't mean to step on toes, but I caution viewers not to overreact - and likewise, I caution builders to consider what they're depicting. This subject matter probably wasn't the best thing to create - but I implore rational minds to prevail. I can't totally defend or totally oppose this depiction, and ultimately that is what makes it unsettling.

I'm sure most users find these ongoing developments tantalizing... but old-fashioned me really liked the old, simple, vanilla version. As a lurker I enjoyed viewing old content as much as the new, and my only interest in the site was in the creative aspect. The old MOC archives - so nicely organized - were my favorite feature. This leads me to one question: will that old material (up to the disappearance of the site late last year) still be available in some type of archive on the new site? Obviously it's still on Eurobricks - but finding it is far more challenging. It's not really a big deal, mostly because I don't think I'll be an active participant long-term, but I am curious. Wait and see, huh?

Excellent archery range! The build looks very good and matches the source material well. The different structures are nice and the arrangement utilizes the base well. I would like a little more detailing on the base (plants, a few rocks, etc) but I realize the archers would want the range kept clear. The interior is pretty good too. Nice work.

This is another project that I first saw as a lurker. The entire design is richly detailed and I especially like the round tower. The texture of the rock walls is impressive and both sections of the black roof look great. The various details on the base and the climbing vines are nice. I also wonder about the waterwheel - I understand the concept but I've always questioned the effectiveness of the design unless there is a large volume of water moving at a high rate. But that's a minor gripe and the overall build is excellent.