An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

That’s a pretty big statue



So the Federal Arts Commission has decided that the new MLK memorial is too “confrontational.” When I first read this and saw the image, I was ready to call SUSPECT, thinking this was about that “beware of the scary black man” foolishness because the arms-crossed gesture combined with a serious expression is generally code for “I’m a little pissed off.” I kind of like it, but the Christian in me is NOT a big fan of statues of individual people this huge. Looks too much like idol worship. I guess its no different than the Lincoln or Jefferson Memorial(my favorite), so if you like those, this might be your kind of thing. But would he want something this big?

However, back on topic, the commission’s problem is not that he looks angry, but he looks like a totalitarian dictator because it is done in a style similar to other images of dictators in history such as China, Russia or the most recent one we tore down in Iraq. Maybe its the crossing of the arms or the open leg stance. Either way, they want it torn down and done again. What do you think? Unhappy With “Confrontational” Image, U.S. Panel Wants King Statue Reworked – washingtonpost.com

BTW – Wouldn’t it be awesome if this thing was finished next year and a black president gave the unveiling/induction speech? Yes or yes?
Ahhh…symbolism over substance…how delightfully American.

  • runasim
    Judging from the picture, I 'm also reminded ot statues of Lenin and the like.

    But art that I find jarring is not something that affects me deeply. I just move on to something that speaks to me.
    I found the modernity of the Egyptian themed additions to the Louvre extremely off-putting., because I saw no link to the history based main buildings. However, that didn't prevent from going inside to see what I could find to appreciate.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    I would think that open, welcoming arms would be more appropriate.
  • Aine
    The artist won the commission based on a very different concept- of MLKs head and shoulders emerging from a boulder (almost Mount Rushmore like). Either he decided for himself that this change was a great idea,or somebody gave approval for him to change it. Either way, it is a style that is not only not reflective of MLK, but not reflective of his era or style. Like runasim, to me it is very totalitarian / soviet era in style.
  • Maybe this is the artists way of fighting the "Santa Clausification" of MLK.
  • Lynx
    I don't know what the artists intentions were, but I agree with Chris that the US is turning MLK from the black radical that he was to Bill Cosby, which he most definitely wasn't. (it should be noted that I admire both men, though of course MLK is in another league). Black and angry is no longer kosher, and no one wants to imagine that MLK was anything but a conciliatory figure. He wasn't, he was a fighter, he HAD to be a fighter. Conciliatory like Obama is fine for now, but back then the country didn't need a gentle nudge, it needed a great big shove, and that's what MLK gave it. He is a hero because of that.

    I don't really like the statue myself it DOES remind me of an Iron Curtain era statues. I guess for me it'd be more appropriate to have a more abstract statue that puts MLK in the context of the history he was a part of.
  • archangel
    thanks dear Angela Winters and it's good to see you back with such a strong piece. More. More.

    dr.e
  • Rudi
    Litghten up, the statue isn't a re-enactment/approval of Tommy Smith and John Carlos in Mexico City. MLK wasn't Huey Newton or Malcolm X, but he was controversial. I hope this doesn't end up like the Vietnam Memorial with a banal statue for the whitre folks...
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC