Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial | Boston Common | Downtown

And furthermore, if they had just put up a statue of MLK people would have been wondering more loudly why Boston has a statue of someone only tangentially connected to the city, funded by brahmins looking to assuage their guilt in the face of the city's "racist" image.

Now, everyone is talking about MLK in connection to Boston and the antiracist columnists of The Globe sang the monument's praises.

View attachment 33207
There has to be a balance between attention-getting outrageousness and good art. There could be a statue of a giant hand with an upraised middle finger, which would be the talk of the nation and get plenty of tourists, but what would be the point?
 
That statue needs to see a urologist. There some serious erosion, and probably unbearable pain.
 

When they mention that in this country love is never shown in the public square I think that rings so true. All of our monuments are about power, strength, capital, resources etc and it really permeates down throughout our whole society. All of the biggest heroes and people that are looked up to are the people who can gather the largest sums of money or power. We have rockefeller center the monument to
And we made it onto the Daily Show: Starts at 5:00.

That was hilarious!
 

When they mention that in this country love is never shown in the public square I think that rings so true. All of our monuments are about power, strength, capital, resources etc and it really permeates down throughout our whole society. All of the biggest heroes and people that are looked up to are the people who can gather the largest sums of money or power. We have rockefeller center the monument to


That was hilarious!
That's a really good point about love being exhibited in public statues. I hadn't thought about that one, but it's important. Power and conquest have been the primary themes of statues in western civilization for the past many centuries, so it is good to have a public statue that is about love for a change.
 
I don't hate it like some posters, but I'm not going to go out of my way to defend it either.

The simple fact is that it is a national and even international laughingstock. The bar for not being the world's punchline is exceedingly low, and yet Boston somehow tripped right over it and landed on its collective face. No amount of impassioned soliloquies in here is going to change the public perception out there, and that perception isn't good.
 
That's a really good point about love being exhibited in public statues. I hadn't thought about that one, but it's important. Power and conquest have been the primary themes of statues in western civilization for the past many centuries, so it is good to have a public statue that is about love for a change.
Philadelphia is waay ahead of you.
 
I don't hate it like some posters, but I'm not going to go out of my way to defend it either.

The simple fact is that it is a national and even international laughingstock. The bar for not being the world's punchline is exceedingly low, and yet Boston somehow tripped right over it and landed on its collective face. No amount of impassioned soliloquies in here is going to change the public perception out there, and that perception isn't good.

DZ, always respect your thoughts... but does this really make us a laughingstock? Worldwide? People are finding it humorous... from some angles... so what...

Is that really a bad thing? We host something that's purposefully different, that's meant to be about love and commitment - and, yes, inadvertently, suggestive for some. Can't we laugh?

I maintain this reaction may be good for this memorial. People worldwide are going to flock to see it. And yes, some will laugh. Wonderful. We all share the joke. We get it. Still makes you think. Still about love. Possibly even recasts the uptight brand of our city. God forbid!

Like it our not. Maybe we need more surprises like this...
 
I don't hate it like some posters, but I'm not going to go out of my way to defend it either.

The simple fact is that it is a national and even international laughingstock. The bar for not being the world's punchline is exceedingly low, and yet Boston somehow tripped right over it and landed on its collective face. No amount of impassioned soliloquies in here is going to change the public perception out there, and that perception isn't good.

I once again redirect your attention to the proud city of Brussels, which has for centuries been adored for its statue of public urination. Or if you want another example - whatever the heck this is:


What the heck is this picasso loser trying to pull? His art all looks like aliens!

People snickering at something is not the same as them laughing at us.
 
As thoughtfully discussed by an op-ed columnist in Phoenix, of all places:

I've read a few articles and posts that pretty well echo this Phoenix author's column, but none have delivered the message better yet, IMO. Well-written, with a clear and admirably defended thesis.
 
DZ, always respect your thoughts... but does this really make us a laughingstock? Worldwide?

For a minute yes. Yes it does. Once it stops being brand new (ie as early as tomorrow) people will move on to the next shiny object.

I have seen articles about it from across the pond, so maybe not "worldwide" but its notoriety has certainly spread outside of the US.
 
I encourage anyone who has not seen it in person to do so. You may not love it, and you may even hate it, but the derision it has received based on terrible photographs spread through social media, necessarily rendering a sculptural object that can only be appreciated in three dimensions into a flat two dimensional image is, in my opinion, wholly unwarranted. In another day and age before the social media frenzy that sweeps anything different or controversial into an uncontrollable vortex, the Embrace would have still engendered criticism and controversy, but in a more measured and reasonable manner.
 
UKHaDyT.png


At least we can all agree that the most embarrassing thing in this photo is Tremont On The Common.
 
Last edited:
I don't think it has to be a slow news week to cover this story.

I think it can be somewhat objectively argued that MLK was the last American (and one of the last world) heroes ever.

What I mean by that is our country and our planet have become so cynical that whenever a great man or woman rises to the top, there are 1000s of news outlets looking to tear them down. If MLK were alive today, certain news outlets would be looking into MLK's extramarital affairs, and not the causes he actually stood for.

I think that so many people in the country truly care about MLK stood for that they expect one of the most prolific art projects completed in his name to be of the highest quality. For many, myself included, the sculptor and the city fell short.

During his life, Martin Luther King was SAVAGELY taken down by both the mainstream media and the majority of white America that it catered to. He was constantly accused of inciting hatred and violence; the FBI viewed him as a national security threat and tried to blackmail him; he was vilified for his opposition to the Vietnam War, his condemnation of American militarism, and his support for union workers. When he was killed, some polls revealed he only had about a 25% approval rating.

Essentially, everything that the right wing accuses the Black Lives Matter movement of today is exactly what the media and white America accused MLK of 60 years ago.

The only reason MLK is as universally revered as he is today is because the true nature of his life, his struggle, and his politics has been whitewashed to make Americans feel better about our very dark history.
 
During his life, Martin Luther King was SAVAGELY taken down by both the mainstream media and the majority of white America that it catered to. He was constantly accused of inciting hatred and violence; the FBI viewed him as a national security threat and tried to blackmail him; he was vilified for his opposition to the Vietnam War, his condemnation of American militarism, and his support for union workers. When he was killed, some polls revealed he only had about a 25% approval rating.
He also was very likely assassinated by the US government itself.
Who killed Martin Luther King Jr.? His family believes James Earl Ray was framed.
Until her own death in 2006, Coretta Scott King, who endured the FBI’s campaign to discredit her husband, was open in her belief that a conspiracy led to the assassination. Her family filed a civil suit in 1999 to force more information into the public eye, and a Memphis jury ruled that the local, state and federal governments were liable for King’s death. The full transcript of the trial remains posted on the King Center’s website.

“There is abundant evidence,” Coretta King said after the verdict, “of a major, high-level conspiracy in the assassination of my husband.” The jury found the mafia and various government agencies “were deeply involved in the assassination. … Mr. Ray was set up to take the blame.”
 
Beginning to see one or two pics on social media from friends visiting the city and getting photos taken at it.
Sure it looks weird from certain angles but it's an ambitious piece.
The initial online giggling and faux outrage will give way to it becoming an iconic and conversation provoking landmark.
 

Back
Top