[ad_1]
Journalist Cristian Tudor Popescu says that Bucharest currently does not have a representative monument and that all the statues built in recent years are “horrible”. Under these conditions, the fact that the current mayor, Nicușor Dan, has announced that no new monuments will be financed is good news, says the journalist.
Cristian Tudor Popescu: These are statues, I saw Nicusor Dan said no more statues are made. It is no longer a priority. Let’s thank God they no longer do. At least that’s what I saw in this city, in addition to the ones we have. We currently do not have a representative monument for Bucharest. When you put a postcard or when you want to sell the image of the city as a tourist, how does everyone – Big Ben in London, Eiffel Tower in Paris, Sagrada Familia in Barcelona – do it – what do you put in Bucharest?
The construction of the Romanian Athenaeum or the Arc de Triomphe is placed on most postcards with Bucharest.
Cristian Tudor Popescu: The Arc de Triomphe is a small-scale copy of L ‘Arc de Triomphe in Paris. And the Athenaeum is not a Romanian style building, it is a 19th century building.
Instead, what have we built in recent years? To each mayor, after putting the “potato on the peg” (Renaissance Memorial – Eternal Glory to Heroes and the Romanian Revolution of December 1989, no.), “The Little One on the Skewer”, whatever you want to call it. It is a stone spike in which a gogoloi is trapped. That is the Plaza of the Revolution. What does this have to do with the Revolution? Can you put something like a symbol of Bucharest? To every mayor who came after that thing was planted there, another roll of the bag, I asked this question in the election campaign: will they get that thing out of there? And he said yes. Everyone said it was a terrible disaster. Nobody took it out, it stayed there, thank you.
Have you heard who Charles de Gaulle is? Do you know what he did? Charles de Gaulle was a waiter. This is how he is presented in the city of Bucharest, “Little Paris”. There, at the entrance to Herăstrău, there is a man holding his napkin in his hand, he is missing about 3-4 plates. He sits down a bit, napkin in hand, and seems to jump over to a table to serve something. What does that statue have to do with General de Gaulle? It’s a waiter sirthe, Chas come to take the order. It is the product of the mind of an artist. How do you put de Gaulle in that position? It is a total aberration.
I’m not talking about “Udila’s ass” (Cross of the century, Do not). It is not a metaphorical description, I avoid metaphors in journalism. Let’s start with a fact: Udila was a thief who was arrested in the late 1990s and, while in prison, the man wanted out on the grounds of a medical reason, namely the atrophy of his sex glands. He wrote in black and white that he wanted it removed for that. And then that round object with some holes, which was planted there, in Charles de Gaulle, initially, it was called the Cross of the Century, it was called “c ** de Udila”, in the urban folklore of Bucharest. Now they moved him and took him higher, to Herăstrău.
I’m not talking about the ribs the pork in front of Casa Chispa (Alas, no.), also on a gastronomic basis. Pork ribs representing something related to the suffering of political prisoners. At best, it could be a rotten ship.
These are the monuments of Bucharest at the moment. You don’t want to know how much those horrible things cost. You don’t want to know how much that “hartista” made.
Editing: Monica Bonea
