They strip prisoners to disempower them
That Statue continues to rile the pesky women. This is a point I hadn’t thought of:
Livia Gershon at Smithsonian Magazine:
Hambling, for her part, tells the Evening Standard’s Robert Dex that the nude figure is not meant to depict Wollstonecraft, but women of all eras.
Really. If the naked figure is meant to depict women of all eras, why is it so extremely young, thin, fit, muscular, Aryan, tiny-breasted, and deformed in the genital region? Why is it a Hitleresque flawless specimen with a basketball where the crotch should be?
But also…why in hell would an artist commissioned to honor Mary Wollstonecraft decide to leave Mary Wollstonecraft out of it? It’s so…how we still think of women if we’re unwary. “Women must not seek the limelight, women must not stand out, women must serve everyone else, women must Be Kind, a good woman never appears in public.” Even when it’s a statue to honor a particular woman!
“She’s [an] everywoman and clothes would have restricted her,” the artist says. “Statues in historic costume look like they belong to history because of their clothes.”
Sure, and that’s why there are all these statues of naked Lincoln, naked Churchill, naked Einstein, naked Marx.
Regarding the slim, muscular body of the woman depicted in the statue, Hambling says, “As far as I know, she’s more or less the shape we’d all like to be.”
Well we wouldn’t all like to have a fat protruding blob between our legs instead of the normal pubic hair. (It occurred to me to wonder if waxing has become so universal that Hambling has never actually seen a woman with pubic hair. There’s some deep misogyny right there, I tell you what.)
“Mary Wollstonecraft was a rebel and a pioneer, and she deserves a pioneering work of art,” Mary on the Green campaign chair Bee Rowlatt tells BBC News. “This work is an attempt to celebrate her contribution to society with something that goes beyond the Victorian traditions of putting people on pedestals.”
In an interview with the Guardian, Rowlatt adds, “We could have done something really, really boring and ordinary, and, and very Victorian and old fashioned. And, you know, I would be having a slightly easier day today.”
Oh please. Fine, don’t put her on a pedestal; put her at a desk, or in a chair, or on a bridge over the Thames. Portray her in action, doing her work, by all means. But don’t ignore her altogether and swap in a tiny naked athlete with deformed genitalia.
Many people on social media pointed to the contrast between the Wollstonecraft statue and those honoring significant male historical figures.
“Imagine if there was a statue of a hot young naked guy ‘in tribute’ to eg Churchill,” wrote columnist and author Caitlin Moran on Twitter. “It would look mad. This, also, looks mad.”
Well you see it’s like this: men are real people, and stand for themselves. Women are general peopleish types, and they can all be swapped for each other, and summed up by One Perfect Hotty (with bizarro pubic hair).
Really? Yeah, everyone assumes every woman wants to look like something a man might call a perfect 10. Most of us have struggled for decades to be okay with the body we have, and this is just…yuck.
I used to look like that – young, fit…but I got older, and I am not ashamed that my 60 year old body does not look like that. Most young women I know don’t look like that, either, and telling them they want to look like that leads to anorexia and other forms of self-mutilation.
I can give you at least one example of a famous male being portrayed in the nude: Niels Henrik Abel, without a doubt the most famous Norwegian mathematician ever. Just have a look at this monument in his honour. (Sorry, that Wikipedia page exists only in Norwegian. You may need a few more mouse clicks to get a good look at the monument.)
I never liked this monument much, as he is clearly trampling a couple of prone bodies. But I am told that it symbolises the triumph of mind over matter, so there.
The monument is the work of the famous sculptor Gustav Vigeland, who also filled a park in Oslo with sculptures of naked bodies, often entwined, but mostly not overly erotic. (For erotic, see the mausoleum that his brother Emmanuel designed for himself. If you ever come to Oslo, you must see it. But I ramble. Sorry about that, please carry on.)
Whoops, I put a comment here that is now gone. Or did it go into moderation? It had a bunch of links in it, so perhaps that explains it. The short of it is, in Oslo there is a statue of Niels Henrik Abel, famous (male) mathematician, in the nude. Oh, but he strikes a heroic pose, but at least it is one example that men can also have statues of nudes dedicated to them.
Clever framing, here. The objections appear to be that Wollstonecraft is gasp naked, or that it’s unacceptably edgy and modern. The feminist theme is just too controversial. Rowlatt and her statue are ahead of their time. Alas.
No. The objections are varied, but don’t include those. I’m not sure if she’s being disingenuous here, or hearing what she wants to hear.
Still, I’m an artist of sorts myself, and I’ll admit I have some sympathy for any artist who’s cherished work is met with derision, scorn, and complaints. (Except for whoever it was who painted that abomination of Trump with the dead presidents; he can rot in hell.)
Harald, yes, it was just the links; out now! And oh yes, you remind me – I’ve seen a tv thing about that park in Oslo. I liked those sculptures. Because it was a lot of people, and both sexes and a variety of ages and not about Flawless Athletic Bodies, it didn’t come across the way the Newington sculpture does. Also the style is less realist.
Which is something probably every artist has experienced, unless their only audience is their mother (and my mother treated my work with derision, scorn, and complains, so I didn’t even get that).
All, just enter “Vigeland installation” in Google images to see what Harald is talking about.
Oh yes, the style is definitely not very realist! Those bodies are built like tanks. With the exception of the most famous of them all, the toddler with a temper tantrum.
From that angle it looks a bit sado-masochistic but it’s a woman playing horsie.
Back when I lived and studied in Oslo, I passed through that park every day going to and from university. I remember that one, now that I see it again. There are lots of kids among the sculptures, and a great sense of fun and play.
I like it a lot. Thank you for the reminder!
See now, that is amazing. That is without a doubt the best bunch of nude statues ever. Whimsical, charming, challenging, monumental, voluptuous…
The opposite of the shiny cake topper in Islington.