When the Neighbors Don’t Like Your 10-Foot-Tall Transformer Statues

Not some landlord trying to extract futher value from your home.

Since purchasing my home, my stress has evaporated. The freedom and lack of harrassment is priceless.

Do I care about the future price of my home - no, because I don't intend to move in the mid-term, and my mortgage is just rent. I bought my home to live in, not to speculate with

Most people in Anglospheric countries.

It turns out that NIMBYism and housing crises are particularly bad in the USA especially but also the UK, Canada, Australia, and NZ... because in the Anglosphere there is a culture of aspiring to be a freeholder with your own home on your own lot.

Continental Europeans don't mind living in small apartments in dense urban areas. And it's a fact of life for many millions of Asians.

Freestanding homes should join cars on the list of things we need to cut our cultural obsession with.

Someone knowing the arbitrary law of primates is just thinking “they know better.” They know it’s illegal! It’s not a divine mandate; it’s projection of non-existent power of their own. They’ll lean on appeals to hallucinated political power!

No one questions the value of the law. What a sad little police state of NIMBY narcissists.

While I understand that, the loss of both trees can have an impact on how the neighborhood is seen, and reduce property value.

Likewise, I think transformer statues are cool. If I lived on the street, I wouldn’t be surprised if it affected my property value, and potential buyers. I would be annoyed, though.

This is why people formed HOAs, and why people like them.

Is this for real? I mean it’s a granted patent, but it reads like sci-fi

Can you get a patent for just ideas/concepts that you think might pan out in the future, but no one has put into practice, not even the applicant of the patent?

Initial acceptance gave way to offended sensibilities as as those sensibilities changed. Censorship and fig leaves resulted. If such things interest you, search out information about about the history of art and its reception after the early days of the 1500’s, much of which was directly influenced by the Church’s views on aesthetic propriety.

You certainly cannot just cite its initial commission and placement and stop there, not without being wrong in a way that is easily avoidable.

As such my original claim stands: the statue was censored shortly after its creation. It was the beginning of a movement that formally culminated in a decree by the a few decades earlier that codified the that common practice of censorship into mandated Church procedures. So I’m just a few years after it’s creation, the statue of David placed as-is in front a a home would have been the subject of local outrage.

Otherwise:

> In the 1500s there wasn't really advertising

This is simply wrong and requires only a LMGTFY and I will leave that to you. Advertisements extend back to ancient civilizations. Being wrong, and given the presence of public advertising through the centuries, the argument that these robots are, as advertisements (even if I agreed on that), verboten for public display, that argument is invalid.

As for aiming it at children, that is irrelevant because, again, what the person in this article did was not advertising.

Flush Toilets and bottled beer: You've chosen two things that, like the statue of David, would undoubtedly have garnered neighborly ire. So I am claiming that statues of David would not have been well regarded, and your counter claim is something like "Well here are other items that would have also been disapproved of". That sounds much more like agreement than a valid counterclaim.

Further, you've chosen two items that in modern times do actually have examples of their being used as art. Finding examples is again a very simple matter of LMGTFY.

Next, actual advertisement including bear bottles (sometimes just their labels and advertisement, sometimes the objects themselves) and many other mundane objects and products-- including jumbo formats, are regarded by many and collected as art. In general they are frequently collected as a form of nostalgia art, sometimes regarded as kitsch, or for its illuminating of a small cross section of modern life.

In many cases these are also desirable for the true thoughtful care and artistry that went into their design. You'd find very few designers of logos etc. that do not in some way regard what they do as a form of art, even if it doesn't rise to the level (highly subjective) of "high art".