What do you think? Your first question might be how tall was MLK Jr.? He looks oddly short in the sculpture, and he may be tall in your imagination, but the real human being was only 5'7" tall. Adjust your perception and the statue seems fine. I like it. I've been to Winter Park a few times, and I know that park. I think the statue is a nice addition to the place. The city paid $500,000 for it, so the people need to like it. I'd advise you to look at this one until you like it. It's fine. And I don't mind saying that a statue is bad and needs to go.
ADDED: The selection committee involved itself in the design and was responsible for the extra large feet: "When a selection committee member commented that Dr. King 'had big shoes to fill,' a collective decision was made to reflect that symbolism in the statue, so [the artist] enlarged Dr. King’s shoes." Whose shoes was he filling?! That is so dumb. But all the more reason the city needs to learn to like it... and to defend the artist.
Posts
45 comments:
Superior to the butt statue on Boston Common…
Borat voice: Hiiyeee Five!
The city paid $500,000 for it, so the people need to like it.
Oh good lord…
Extremities do look a bit out of proportion with the body. Facial features not bad, but head is a bit square-ish when compared to photos of King. His he supposed to be hailing a cab?
AI states it better than I could:
Michelangelo's David is considered to have some intentional misproportions, particularly in the head, hands, and torso, which are larger than anatomically correct when viewed from a normal perspective. These adjustments were made because the statue was intended to be viewed from below, and Michelangelo wanted to ensure certain features, like David's hands and head, would be visually impactful from that angle, according to art historians.
The statue makes him look fat.
It is not OK.
In modern times there is no excuse for this level of ineptitude. This statue should be the end of several careers in some government somewhere.
The pose is similar to that of the Statue of Liberty, whose head is too small and whose right arm is too long.
"His he supposed to be hailing a cab?"
James Lileks called this style (Lenin, Saddam, the Kims) "The Great Leader Hails a Cab" statues.
rehajm said...
The city paid $500,000 for it, so the people need to like it.
Oh good lord…
Someone probably hired their daughter or cousin or some other nepo bullshit.
He looks like a Flintstone.
When I actually look at that picture I see a mashup combination of MLK and Stalin.
But the statue is a fat version of both of them.
Someone just sucks at making statues.
Part of the problem is the artist assumes a literal point of view and casts the bronze based on that point of view. So sometimes you end up with distortions when viewed from a different angle like from above or the side or the taxpayer..
Better than that Boston perversity. At the time he was growing up in the south, nutritious food of the type that made you full-grown, was rare for most blacks and whites. But he was well-off and middle-class. So, normal for his size. It's a nice statue, and the face is accurate. Enough with the creepy hand and feet stuff.
MLK was 5’6.
the sculptor should be blackballed they did a terrrible job, yes don't get me started on the Boston statue,
I don't mind the big shoes, and the big head seems like a good idea. But that right and the left arm shouldn't have been different in size.
I love bobbleheads. I collect bobbleheads. Bobbleheads are the next Beanie Babies.
Hate to say it, but the pose made me think "lawn jockey."
Anyway its better then the MLK "Supervillian" statue in DC.
Looks like AI.
I just looked up the Boston statue. What the hell?
If this was of a republican, the media would be calling that a Nazi salute.
Well I would need to see it in person - the pictures here, and in the article, don't look at all like him, in my opinion. As for the proportional tweaks, well...... what do you expect, when you commission a piece of art and then put it through a committee? These municipal disasters happen all the time, and nobody ever learns. If Winter Park is happy with it though, then nothing else really matters.
My overall impression is one of awkwardness. The non-lifelike proportions, especially the clown-size shoes/feet, detract from the sense of dignity that a heroic figure's statue should be expected to project. The NYT's photos don't highlight the described disproportion between the enlarged, book-bearing left arm and the other, so the execution of that part I won't comment on, but the idea seems rather odd; why should carrying a book warrant that sort of distortion?
Overall, I don't think the statue does justice to the man. Maybe it's too much to ask that the Nth statue of a famous man (and I have no idea what the current value of N is, but it's more than a few) should really be "original," whatever that means in this context.
Why not pose him at a speaker's podium, as the preacher he was, spelling out his dream? Or is the character-not-color concept just too politically incorrect now?
I guess everybody's worried now about the "tiny hands" thing and the hand and shoe size being a reflection of something else. It's silly.
The Boston statue was supposed to be the shoulders and arms of Martin and Coretta embracing at a pivotal moment in their lives. The photo of that embrace became iconic. The statue, seen from one angle, just looks like a giant floating penis. Maybe that was another way of getting around the "small hands" problem and its implications.
Manny, Moe, and Jack . . . and Martin.
A diversity in shapes, sizes, and height, too.
the media would be calling that a Nazi salute
Obama at Air Force One, waving to the assembled crowd.
The MLK statue in DC was controversial for another reason. The Chinese sculptor couldn't avoid giving Martin "oriental" features. The proportions of that statue may also be wonky, but MLK is barely emerging from the stone, so perhaps it wasn't as noticeable.
While massive statues of Lenin and Stalin were built, none were built for Hitler. That was part of the Nazi acestetic (sic) which favored "the volk" over individual leaders. Per Wikipedia
"statues of him were remarkably rare in public spaces. Hitler's personal preference, combined with the focus of Nazi ideology on the collective "Volk" (people) rather than the individual, contributed to this lack of self-monumentalization. Nazi Propaganda was crafted to portray him as a selfless leader dedicated to Germany's greatness, implying that monuments of him would only be fitting once his mission was complete. "
Martin Luther King had a rounded head with an oval face. That statue looks like an attempt to assimilate King's image to that of Stalin.
see for example:
https://media.gettyimages.com/id/909156734/photo/germany-history-russia-stalin.jpg?s=612x612&w=gi&k=20&c=eeXBE1l0fXUfWsXK_plUAsQAkjrrvCWSpnearx6iprw=
Hitler didn't care about having a statue, but he loved the money he was paid by the Reichspost for use of his image on their stamps. Lots and lots and lots of stamps.
Google AI sez...
Big shoes to fill" is an idiom used to describe someone taking over a role or position from a highly successful or well-regarded predecessor. It implies that the new person will face high expectations and have to work hard to match the accomplishments or reputation of the previous individual. In essence, it means the new person has a difficult task ahead of them to live up to the standards set by the person they are replacing.
I guess one could extend from that MLK left big shoes to fill, though how one is supposed to grasp that from out of proportion feet I'm not sure.
Doing a little other Googling shows that 5-7 is less than average height (current data) but not excessively as by state averages run from 5-9 to just over 5-10.5 with the US average being just under 5-10. Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee are among the tallest now.
https://www.instagram.com/p/C_gEUsxRD3E/?igsh=MThjdmI4bjRyZDN5YQ==
The USA seems to be going down the USSR way of massive monuments to sacred leaders, MLK being the holiest of holies. No doubt 20 years from now, when the USA is even further left, we'll blow up the Jefferson monument and replace it with a massive Bill and Hillary Clinton monument.
Sculptors have had to use distortion for centuries--a large sculpture on a large plinth or pedestal must be out of proportion to appear in proportion. The Forrest statue removed from public view here in 2016 is a good example.
It's similar to the way the Parthenon columns need some extra width in the middle to appear straight (IIRC).
In this case, the sculptor just sucks.
My suggestion: MLK mounted on a horse. In the immediate rear are JFK and Jackie. He is leading them to a better future. You can see it in their faces. The statue should be placed outside the Kennedy Center. Some distance away should be placed a sixty foot gilded statue of Trump welcoming them to their bright future.
That's interesting, Christopher B.
What about average shoe size by state?
MLK WAS a Republican.
He got a big hayud!
You know who had a big head?
Elaine
Untitled book?
From his office in the Kremlin, Stalin had a view of St. Stephen's Cathedral. That view irritated him immensely. He had the cathedral torn down. The plan was to build a skyscraper there and on top of the skyscraper there would be a huge statue of Lenin. It was designed to be the biggest structure on earth. Then WWII happened. There was nothing there but an enormous hole in the ground. I don't know if it was the world's biggest hole in the ground, but it was a truly impressive hole in the ground. It was in its way a truly fitting monument to Stalin and his achievements......After the war, they installed an outdoor pool there, but the hole was a truly haunting and resonant image of nada.......After the fall of the USSR, an exact replica of St Stephen's Cathedral was put up.
I’ve never meet Some Critics. He or she really does have an opinion about everything.
oh the lucy statue, that really was nightmare fuel,
You all know he attended parties where women were raped, right?
If the picture is correct that's the "military left" arm of King that got bulked up--i.e. it's his right arm. But there's a long tradition of altering dimensions or poses of statues to signify or emphasize a point. Look at all the statues of generals mounted on horseback. There's as much a "language of equestrian statuary" as there is a "language of flowers".
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.