Mary Wollstonecraft statue

So some people must have thought a naked woman was OK! I wonder if the artist's fame swayed them?

As someone said on tv last night teachers won’t be able to take pupils to see this statue and they won’t have photos taken next to it.

Yes the runner up statue was by martin Jennings, if you google you will see it. Its lovely in my view.

What a shame and a wasted opportunity.

It is fine as a sculpture on a gallery, expressing all that the sculptor had in mind, but as a tribute to a specific woman it is inappropriate.

I think that was the case, I have seen a picture of the runner up statue, clothed with books, so I assume it was a process as you describe.

I wonder does anyone know how this was decided? Usual process for a public work of art is to hold a proposal process where artists submit their ideas. It seems this wasn'tthe way this was done.

Yes, you are right about "public art" vegansrock

Apparently the financial contributors are disappointed.

Perhaps they'll all be asking for a refund as the goods are not fit for purpose.

I did hear someone on the news last night saying, "well at least we are all talking about Mary Wollstonecraft"

I don't like the statue at all, though.

It cost £143,000! It would be interesting to hear Mary’s thoughts on how such a large sum could be spent.

This statue isn't an image of Mary Wolstencroft but is to represent her, according to the artist.
I agree with those who say you would never see Dickens or any other significant male author portrayed as naked. The statue is a good work of art, like all those Greek gods and Michelangelo/AlmaTadama beautiful men. It isn't appropriate to represent Wolstencroft.

First reaction? Omg how horrible! I would say that even not knowing what it was supposed to be. Totally out of keeping in the natural surroundings and totally out of keeping with Mary Wollstonecraft.
How much money did it cost if it took 10 years to fundraise? Much much better things it could have been used for.

I suppose you could argue that its highlighted misogyny, and you could argue she would approve of that.

It does not do Mary Wollstonecraft justice. Maggie Hambling is a fine artist, but this certainly does not reflect ‘every woman’,
or Mary herself.
Apparently the financial contributors are disappointed. Such a shame.

Would be interesting to hear the views of those who contributed financially and helped to raise money for the statue. It is not a representation of Mary Wollstonecraft so unless they knew before hand what they were getting they must be very disappointed and even appalled at the end result.

Blinko you have spectacularly missed the point

That's not the same though is it. I am looking forward to the statue of churchill with his penis out or david attenborough for example.

kircubbin2000

Blinko, how can you not get it?How many famous male statues are naked?

Erm....Michelangelo's David? Various Greek gods? Not so many actual people dotted about public park and squares in London perhaps.

I like her portraits and find them (like others) interesting and quirky but I think this really is a mistake.

I like Maggie Hambling and enjoyed the recent BBC2 documentary about her, she’s very quirky and opinionated, and a talented artist. If I saw this sculpture in a gallery I’d probably enjoy having a good look and discussing the meaning , but as a public memorial to a pioneering feminist I have to be on the side of those who think this is inappropriate.

I don't like it either although I understand the point. I don't think it really encapsulates the point, unfortunately.

But I'm probably not the best person to ask as I don't feel particularly positive about her Conversation with Oscar Wilde. I think maybe I just don't "get" her sculpture.

I take that point but can't agree that it looks a fine statue

As for and I can see where Maggie Hambling is coming from, well possibly but I think she is wrong. She has trashed this woman's memory.

I don’t think we’re disagreeing, Callistemon. I was questioning whether some of those who contributed to it feel they were misled as they expected a statue of her.

It's an insult to her memory.

I am not against naked statues if appropriate but this is far from appropriate to commemorate the woman she was and her memory.

Hideous.