A kneeling figure
Graham Douglas in a comment told us about a statue that has been moved from a prominent place in front of the National Trust property Dunham Massey Hall.
The Dunham Massey Hall sundial is a lead sculpture depicting a kneeling Black man holding a sundial on his head. It was created during the early 18th century, and until 2020 stood outside Dunham Massey Hall, a stately home in Cheshire, England.
Its subject matter attracted criticism and in 2020 the National Trust removed it amid the global wave of statue removals connected with the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. It is currently held in storage.
The sundial sculpture is a black, polychromed cast-lead statue. It depicts a life-size kneeling figure of an African man wearing a feathered loincloth and holding a stone and brass sundial on his head. The figure’s eyes are painted white with blue pupils, and the loincloth is painted blue and green. It dates from the 18th century and has been attributed to Andries Carpentière (1677–1737). It is thought that it was cast after a model by Jan van Nost (c.1660-1711-13) which was installed in 1701 in the Privy Garden of Hampton Court Palace.[1] It was probably commissioned by George Booth, 2nd Earl of Warrington (1675-1758).
The figure is an example of a tradition in western European art called the “blackamoor“. These caricatures appeared in a wide range of arts including sculpture, painting, architectural decoration, ceramics, silverware and furniture, and generally depicted a generic black person in exoticised costume and posted in a servile position, holding an object.[1]
Close to the sculpture was a plaque containing the words: “This sundial is in the style of one commissioned by King William III. It represents Africa, one of four continents known at the time. The figure depicts a Moor, not a slave, and he has knelt here since before 1750.”[2
But “a Moor” and “a slave” are not mutually exclusive, I think. Some “Moors” owned slaves but others were slaves. A kneeling figure with a sundial on his head doesn’t look like a free citizen to me.
In June 2020, the National Trust announced that it was “reviewing” the statue amid the global wave of statue removals during the Black Lives Matter protests.[2][3]
Shortly afterwards, the Trust took the decision to remove the statue from its prominent location outside Dunham Massey Hall, stating that the sculpture “caused upset and distress because of the way it depicts a black person and because of its prominence at the front of the house”. The National Trust also stated that it did not plan to “censor or deny” colonial history, but intended to devise a new way of displaying it “in a way that fully acknowledges the appalling histories of slavery and the slave trade”. Historic England noted that that the National Trust had not requested listed building consent prior to the removal of the Grade II-listed sundial.[4]
In a way, of course, the removal sanitizes history, and makes Dunham Massey Hall look more innocent than it was. In a way that’s unfortunate. At the same time, leaving it there feels like an insult to every non-pale visitor to the place.
Yes? Yes.
I suppose, ultimately, the decision around the sanitise/insult quandry can only be decided in consultation with those insulted.
For me, I’ve always felt a bit uncomfortable about the statue and its removal was something of a relief. I’d like to see it replaced with a permanent plaque explaining and acknowledging the role of slavery in the history of the house. The statue itself should be somewhere where it can only be seen by deliberate choice, also with an explanation and acknowledgement of the harm caused.
But, yeah, there are no simple solutions.
The reality is that history happened. Sanitised history is, for want of a better word, bullshit.
Destroying objectionable public art is also a never-ending process. Objections can be found to damn near everything. And why stop at public art? Why not purge libraries and museums as well? This is to create an illusory, politically correct ahistorical and anti-historical world for the next and all subsequent generations to inhabit.
A good solution is to be found in Budapest. In a specially set-aside field, surviving statues from the Stalinist past are on display. A lot are not, having been melted down and their bronze recycled. But those remaining are preserved, for subsequent generations to study and respond to as they please.
Arguably, we should not try to control the future, or its consciousness.
A “blackamoor” statue in front of a private house is hardly public art.
And the statue wasn’t destroyed, it was moved.
“Politically correct” is a dismissive label to use for removing a statue that basically says “NIGGER” to a much less conspicuous place.
What was the point of putting the statue there in the first place, do you suppose? Art?
Ophelia at #3 —
“What was the point of putting the statue there in the first place, do you suppose? Art?”
Probably not art, but that’s actually a really good question, and I don’t think we should just make assumptions about the answer. I agree that it sends an ugly message today, and that’s a more than sufficient reason to park it somewhere else.
They should remove it for being ugly. It looks like a middle school kid’s art project,
Specifically, a racist middle school student high on drugs (“lol, and then he’ll have a sundial on his head”).
I would say at a guess its purpose was probably to quietly affirm in the eyes of white viewers their own racial superiority, and to suggest to any black viewers that they might think twice about getting ‘uppity.’
But I am reminded of the Tales of the Brothers Grimm including Hansel and Gretel, Little Red Riding Hood, and Snow White.. I read somewhere that the brothers’ intention was not to frighten children just for the hell of it, but to inform them that evil exists in the world, that they had best be aware of its many forms, and to do this in a supportive context: eg reading or being read to by their mother or trusted relative.
I suppose a case could also be made for banning Shakespeare’s Othello, as some would hold that it shows its black protagonist as by nature gullible and easily led (and misled) and so likely confirmed the prejudices of many in the audience. (That was arguably not The Bard’s intention: likely quite the contrary. But the message received is the message sent.)
Sorry, but nothing above has convinced me that the Hungarian solution is not the best.
I repeat: the object was not banned.
Also I shouldn’t even be calling it a statue. It’s not a work of art, it’s a lawn ornament. There was a fashion for lawn ornament jockeys once upon a time – my aunt and uncle had one adjacent to a barn with stables. I was mildly fascinated by it as a child.
The one at Dunham Massey Hall is a lawn ornament that makes a statement about empire and conquest along with wealth and power. It ain’t the equivalent of Othello.
Also, looking at it again – Skeletor has a point. It’s ugly, and what’s more it detracts from the chaste Georgian vibe of the house. Being out in front of the house it’s the first thing visitors see – or it was. The National Trust did a spot of re-decorating.
Dunham Park was a favourite place to go for a walk when I lived nearby (in the 1950s). I never visited the house, however, but I don’t think it was open to the public at that time.
It’s funny, I feel like I know where to stand at my nearest National Trust property to take that exact photo, just without the fugly statue. It think they have a disused fountain in that spot. Just to the left is the gateway to the cafe, on the right is the path leading to the stables, and the lake is behind the photographer.
Anyway, I always find the “but is it Art?” debate pointless. Sure, call it Art, why not? But then move on to whether it’s any good, or makes an interesting point, or has any other quality that makes it worth keeping on display. Ugly racist law ornaments aren’t, and don’t, so they are not.
Now, what are the chances we can get all those naked lady paintings and statues put into storage? ;)
@catwhisperer #10 I know the place you’re describing, but the offensive object was by the front door of the manor house. Stables to your left, ornamental gardens to the right, bulk of the deer park behind you. They’ve put an explanatory notice in the spot where it used to stand.
Walking in the grounds of posh houses is one of the pleasing features of life over there. Hampton Court, Nonsuch, Ham House, Burghley, Hatfield, Blenheim – good stuff.
Ugh, I’ve seen photos now of how it looks as you approach the house. I can just imagine cheerfully walking down that long driveway and then thinking “oh hell no, is that what I think it is?” as I get closer to that abomination.
The sun came out yesterday afternoon, after about a week of mostly rain, so I popped on down to my local NT place. Turns out that their roundabout thingy is much bigger than Dunham Massey Hall’s. If I try and get a photo with the fountain just at the front of the shot, the house is reeeeally far away, with far more windows visible. Plus, the windows are fancier. So really it’s just the type of materials used, and the presence of a turning circle that they have in common. Never mind, I would have gone down anyway, it was the last day of my Christmas holiday.
For anyone who enjoys the Big Old Trees that can often be found in the grounds of these places – Croft Castle. The place is absolutely littered with ancient trees, including a 1000-year old oak tree that looks like nothing you would picture when you think of a tree. If Ents were real, this would be one.