Soooooo...is the moral of the diorama "Don't eat at McDonald's"" ????

Good point Frank and if it was the artists intention to get a reaction he succeded, however does that qualify it as art?

it comes across as little more than pretentious nonsense aimed simply at achieving a "shock factor" under the pretense of making some sort of deep & meaningful statement.

Sorry to burst your bubble there Craig but this kind of 'art' has NOTHING to do with conveying the scale and brutality of war and EVERYTHING to do with increasing the notoriety and fortunes of its creators.
If you want to see real art that deals with the horrors of war then go and visit the War Museum in London and see paintings by people who have actually experienced it.
Don't fall prey to the cynical, pretentious and ultimately worthless crap being touted by these morons and the whole Britart scene.

Stuckism is an art movement that was founded in 1999 in Britain by Billy Childish and Charles Thomson to promote figurative painting in opposition to conceptual art. The Stuckists formed as an alternative to the Charles Saatchi-patronised Young British Artists (also known as Brit Art or abbreviated to YBAs). The original group of thirteen artists has since expanded to over 120 groups around the world. Childish left the group in 2001.

They have staged many shows, but have gained more attention for outspoken media comments and demonstrations, particularly outside Tate Britain against the Turner Prize, sometimes dressed in clown costumes. After exhibiting mainly in small galleries in Shoreditch, London, they were given their first show in a major public museum in 2004, The Walker Art Gallery as part of the Liverpool Biennial. Other campaigns mounted by the group include official avenues, such as standing for parliament, reporting Saatchi to the Office of Fair Trading to complain about his power in the art world, and applying under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for Tate Gallery trustee minutes, which started a media scandal about the purchase of Chris Ofili's work, The Upper Room (which led to an official rebuke of the Tate by the Charity Commission).

The winner of the £25,000 Prize was Mark Wallinger. His display at the Turner Prize show was Sleeper, a film of him dressed in a bear costume wandering around an empty museum, but the prize was officially given for State Britain, which recreated all the objects in Brian Haw's anti-war display in Parliament Square, London. The judges commended Wallinger's work for its "immediacy, visceral intensity and historic importance", and called it "a bold political statement with art's ability to articulate fundamental human truths."
The prize was presented by Dennis Hopper

Attention was also given to transvestite Grayson Perry who exhibited pots decorated with sexual imagery, and was the prize winner. He wore a flouncy skirt to collect the prize, announced by Sir Peter Blake,

A great deal was made in the press about the winning entry by Simon Starling, which was a shed that he had converted into a boat, sailed down the River Rhine and turned back into a shed again. Two newspapers bought sheds and floated them to parody the work.

i think this is grossly offensive,especialy were children can see it

Well, I think it's a waste of figures and time. Makes no sense.

I quite like it. It's one person's interpretation of history. Art brings debate and tests the boundaries of human imagination and conceptions. This does it wonderfully.

Appreciate it it for what you will, and gain something from it.

This is as subtle and creative as the state-sponsored art of the Nazis or the U.S.S.R. . The only thing I 'gain' from it is a depression that these clowns get such coverage when decent, figurative artists don't...

Appreciate it it for what you will, and gain something from it.

If you were the organizer of a model contest or show and this or something like this showed up at the door and the modeller wanted to enter it as subject to be judged in the diorama category, what would you do? How would or could this be judged?