Craig, that is not a bad point, and I really like the comparison in the abstract as a thought exercise. There is always the question of bias in the thinking, and I don't exclude it. However, I will point out that there are a lot of statues of Martin Luther King around the US, so the non-representative nature of this particularly piece ma…
Craig, that is not a bad point, and I really like the comparison in the abstract as a thought exercise. There is always the question of bias in the thinking, and I don't exclude it. However, I will point out that there are a lot of statues of Martin Luther King around the US, so the non-representative nature of this particularly piece may have more to do with aesthetic preferences than a two tier system. I can't remember when the most recent statue of Lincoln was put up, but it's possible we were honoring him today it would be in a non-representative way. Furthermore, both the artist who executed the statue is Black, and the son of MLK, Jr. approves of this statue, so I think the comparison is not necessary.
I’m not sure what the artist’s skin color or the fact that the subjects’ child likes it has to do with much of anything (maybe the child has as bad taste in art as maybe I do after all (yes, I am glad he likes it though)). Are you saying it’s bad art if a white guy did it? I don’t think that’s what you mean but I do see that as a defense that people are throwing up to justify the artwork which is a bad take. The artist’s physical traits should have nothing to do with the appreciation (or lack thereof) of a piece of art.
In the discussion of a statue of MLK, Jr., you were bringing up Lincoln. I thought you were making a comparison on the basis of race, that your argument was that we might be more reluctant to "depersonalize" a statue about a white famous person than a Black famous person. I was arguing that the "depersonalization" was likely not racialized (because the artist was of the same race as the depicted person), but more likely to be a factor of aesthetics and the times.
The reason I bring up the son is because, in my opinion, the best art is contentious and makes people think. As a result, for any piece of art, the reception is often mixed, because it takes time to tame and become familiar with a new piece of art. I am not surprised we can find people who don't like this statue, and not surprised to find people who do. So I don't think we can cite any person's opinion and declare it authoritative... except another way to assess the value of this statue besides aesthetics, is to ask: "Would MLK, Jr. have approved?" Obviously this statue is intended to honor him, so if he feels honored mission accomplish. It's hard to know the wishes of someone who has been dead for so long, but I think the son's opinion is probably the closest we have to knowing MLK, Jr.'s opinion on this.
Sorry you misunderstood my Lincoln reference. No, I was merely making a statement that a statue of Lincoln’s beard made as little sense in honoring Lincoln as this MLK one did to me. I understand that knowing the back story makes it somewhat more relevant but I’m still not a fan. Like you, I’m glad his son likes it.
I live near Chicago and am very familiar with the head scratching Picasso in Daley Center. Nobody knows what that is supposed to be either but we really weren’t meant to. That doesn’t bother me. It isn’t the abstract that turns me off with the MLK statue. I just don’t see this as a statue honoring the man. Matter of taste for sure.
Craig, that is not a bad point, and I really like the comparison in the abstract as a thought exercise. There is always the question of bias in the thinking, and I don't exclude it. However, I will point out that there are a lot of statues of Martin Luther King around the US, so the non-representative nature of this particularly piece may have more to do with aesthetic preferences than a two tier system. I can't remember when the most recent statue of Lincoln was put up, but it's possible we were honoring him today it would be in a non-representative way. Furthermore, both the artist who executed the statue is Black, and the son of MLK, Jr. approves of this statue, so I think the comparison is not necessary.
I’m not sure what the artist’s skin color or the fact that the subjects’ child likes it has to do with much of anything (maybe the child has as bad taste in art as maybe I do after all (yes, I am glad he likes it though)). Are you saying it’s bad art if a white guy did it? I don’t think that’s what you mean but I do see that as a defense that people are throwing up to justify the artwork which is a bad take. The artist’s physical traits should have nothing to do with the appreciation (or lack thereof) of a piece of art.
In the discussion of a statue of MLK, Jr., you were bringing up Lincoln. I thought you were making a comparison on the basis of race, that your argument was that we might be more reluctant to "depersonalize" a statue about a white famous person than a Black famous person. I was arguing that the "depersonalization" was likely not racialized (because the artist was of the same race as the depicted person), but more likely to be a factor of aesthetics and the times.
The reason I bring up the son is because, in my opinion, the best art is contentious and makes people think. As a result, for any piece of art, the reception is often mixed, because it takes time to tame and become familiar with a new piece of art. I am not surprised we can find people who don't like this statue, and not surprised to find people who do. So I don't think we can cite any person's opinion and declare it authoritative... except another way to assess the value of this statue besides aesthetics, is to ask: "Would MLK, Jr. have approved?" Obviously this statue is intended to honor him, so if he feels honored mission accomplish. It's hard to know the wishes of someone who has been dead for so long, but I think the son's opinion is probably the closest we have to knowing MLK, Jr.'s opinion on this.
Sorry you misunderstood my Lincoln reference. No, I was merely making a statement that a statue of Lincoln’s beard made as little sense in honoring Lincoln as this MLK one did to me. I understand that knowing the back story makes it somewhat more relevant but I’m still not a fan. Like you, I’m glad his son likes it.
I live near Chicago and am very familiar with the head scratching Picasso in Daley Center. Nobody knows what that is supposed to be either but we really weren’t meant to. That doesn’t bother me. It isn’t the abstract that turns me off with the MLK statue. I just don’t see this as a statue honoring the man. Matter of taste for sure.