Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial | Boston Common | Downtown

[Life Coach Mike]

I love the way it mimics the Parkman Bandstand as an overarching, protective canopy that is easily accessible. There's something about being surrounded, protected by an element that comforts the soul. And I see that that the pavement around it has changed from the original plan. A real improvement with additional elements that surround and encompass the space, offering a sense of an outdoor room and seating for reflection. Now if we can keep the skateboarders off of it!

 

[stick n move]

New render from the globe article.

“Boston Arts Commission green-lights design for King memorial”


https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03...commission-green-lights-design-king-memorial/

 

[George_Apley]

I love the concept behind this memorial. I am not a fan of the aesthetics.

 

[bigpicture7]

I love the concept behind this memorial. I am not a fan of the aesthetics.

For me, the zoomed out view of this (1 page back on this thread) from the NYTimes article in Feb shows an improved landscape design and path layout that looks great and gives me more confidence it will integrate well into the Common.

Regarding the sculpture itself, I've warmed up to it once I thought about scale and context a bit more. I too felt the geometry itself seemed awkward at first glance. However, understanding the scale is what tipped me in the other direction: this thing is a tall arched dome. It is not small. Looking at the people rendered underneath it shows a lot of space above/around the people. It will be like an arched canopy that people pass through and engage with; it is not a stand-alone statue to be examined solely from the outside. And only when you stand quite far back will you see the big-picture of the clasped hands/embrace. I'm good with it now, and look forward to this project coming to fruition.

 

[Blackbird]

Nothing says “MLK” like a knot of disembodied arms!

 

[DBM]

Nothing says “MLK” like a knot of disembodied arms!

I just did some research on this--it's worse than you think.

Per this source below, the sculpture is most explicitly inspired by a photo of MLK Jr. and CSK hugging after he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

In 1964. In Oslo.

https://artnewengland.com/news/boston-common/

That's right: a decade after he left Boston, more than 3,000 miles away. There couldn't be less of a connection to his time in Boston, if they had tried.

Would it have been too much to ask to have a sculpture of him sitting at a study desk, with copies of books by Gandhi, Thoreau, etc., laid open on the desk, and his body posed in a reflective posture? That would pretty obviously connote his time in Boston, and the history-altering significance of his exposure to the canon of nonviolent civil disobedience at BU, would it not?

Barring that, there are so many more obviously stirring and dramatic sculptures that could've been done--like something inspired by an image of him walking at the front line of a protest march, hand-in-hand with CSK, but also hand-in-hand with ministers of varying creeds and complexions.... something like the photo that is repeated all over the sculpture website!

Point being: given the number of schoolgroups that will presumably be brought to see this, this sculpture needs to be pedagogical, instructional, whatever you want to say. "A teachable moment." What the hell does two disembodied hands teach?

End curmudgeonly rant.

 

[MjolnirMan]

Art, like architecture, can absolutely be phenomenal or terrible due to being acontextual to its surroundings. Maybe the Chicago Bean is one example of the former. I may be a philistine, but this is one of the latter cases to me. A magnificent larger-than-life statue of Dr. King himself standing tall on a podium (or at ground level to interact with) seems like it would fit in much better on the Common, Garden, and Comm Ave Mall among the other such statuary than some kind of abstract giant arm blob, although I realize this is less exciting for a marketing professional and/or contemporary artist to pitch. Suggested gimmicks like "tourists will take photos of themselves hugging under it" seems unlikely to be a widespread phenomenon outside said marketers'/artists' pitches.

 

[bigpicture7]

I just did some research on this--it's worse than you think.

Per this source below, the sculpture is most explicitly inspired by a photo of MLK Jr. and CSK hugging after he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

In 1964. In Oslo.

https://artnewengland.com/news/boston-common/

That's right: a decade after he left Boston, more than 3,000 miles away. There couldn't be less of a connection to his time in Boston, if they had tried.

Would it have been too much to ask to have a sculpture of him sitting at a study desk, with copies of books by Gandhi, Thoreau, etc., laid open on the desk, and his body posed in a reflective posture? That would pretty obviously connote his time in Boston, and the history-altering significance of his exposure to the canon of nonviolent civil disobedience at BU, would it not?

Barring that, there are so many more obviously stirring and dramatic sculptures that could've been done--like something inspired by an image of him walking at the front line of a protest march, hand-in-hand with CSK, but also hand-in-hand with ministers of varying creeds and complexions.... something like the photo that is repeated all over the sculpture website!

Point being: given the number of schoolgroups that will presumably be brought to see this, this sculpture needs to be pedagogical, instructional, whatever you want to say. "A teachable moment." What the hell does two disembodied hands teach?

End curmudgeonly rant.

Some fair points in there, but I just want to point out that the King Boston website reiterates throughout that the memorial is supposed to be for both MLK and Coretta Scott King, so I can understand the choice of a sculpture that relates to the two of them. Meanwhile, a series of plaques surrounding the sculpture could provide the educational elements, specifically with regard to the Kings' time in Boston, that you speak of.

 

[MjolnirMan]

Some fair points in there, but I just want to point out that the King Boston website reiterates throughout that the memorial is supposed to be for both MLK and Coretta Scott King

Alternate pitch: a statue of the two of them dressed as in this photograph, near this same location (or on the Common if you need more space for plaques). Those arms could be anyone's.

 

[bigpicture7]

I dunno; I am happy this is happening, and can see the pros/cons of both a traditional vs. abstract/contemporary approach here. Something large-scale and interesting that everyone wants to go explore could be a good thing. I agree with DBM that intertwining some educational elements is pretty critical, though, because it's one thing to prompt exploration...but then you need to deliver a learning experience once peoples' attention is piqued. In that light, I do hope they nicely connect the overall installation to the Kings' time in Boston.

 

[stick n move]

Idk in the age of social media I see this as a hit. People are going to want to take pictures of themselves hugging under the sculpture. It could end up as one of the must see attractions for visitors to the city like the bean is in chicago. It is similar in its mass and reflectivity along with how you can interact by walking inside and under the sculpture.

Heres the original “embrace” photo that the sculpture is modelled from.

A couple more renders:

You can see kings hand position matches the above photo.

 

[RandomWalk]

I like it. It isn’t obvious at first glance what is going on. It inspires conversation and contemplation. That’s better than a statue of a person.

 

[lexicon506]

Honestly the fact that everyone has an opinion on it even before it's installed means it's already a success. No one would care or think about a traditional statue of MLK once the fancy dedication ceremony was over. My only complaint is that the concept is too warm and fuzzy to properly honor one of the most radical figures of 20th century America.

 

[DBM]

My only complaint is that the concept is too warm and fuzzy to properly honor one of the most radical figures of 20th century America.

Well, it's an Establishment production... that said, with stick n move having been kind enough to post the renderings, I feel like this would work well as a sort of parallel piece to the Bill Russell statue complex at City Hall Plaza, i.e., if this concept were reworked to have the more abstract central dominant figure of the hands encircled by an array of lesser pieces that are bluntly representational in depicting hallmark moments from MLK's career--writing Letter From A Birmingham Jail, speaking at March on Washington, leading the Selma March, etc.

But back to your point--indeed, it's always worth remembering that King's radicalism has been sanitized for decades. I feel like in his anointment as a secular saint, it was decreed that everyone can learn about the Obviously Evil stuff he confronted from 1954-1963--i.e., American apartheid. But when his ambitions grew from 1964-68, and he started speaking out on endemic poverty, environmental degradation, Vietnam--the Insidiously Entrenched American pathologies--well, "that can get people squeamish." And how do you reduce all of that into catchphrase as sentimental as I Have A Dream?

 

[Life Coach Mike]

More than anything else MLK has been making us think for the past 60+ years. MLK is more than a man. He is an idea and an ideal. That's what I think this memorial also represents: the idea of embracing all people and the ideal of love. We need to keep the idea and ideal alive, thus the BLM movement and the ongoing struggle for justice for all minorities. I our citizens do not embrace clear ideas and ideals based in love and justice, we may as well surrender to the nihilism we see evident around us.

 

[found5dollar]

I don't think that this sculpture can really be compared to the Chicago Bean. Cloud Gate (the actual name of the Bean) is sculpture for sculptures sake while the King Memorial is a monument to a specific person (or persons if we say it is for MLK and CSK). With the Bean the meaning is what ever you want it to be or nothing at all, while this memorial has a pretty explicit reason and meaning baked into the design. The big issue I see is that people with treat this big shiny thing on the common the same way they do the big shiny thing in Chicago. In Chicago the sculpture has become a meme. You can draw googly eyes on it, you can take inappropriate pictures with it, you can photoshop it dressed up like a ghost, you can stick a dildo on it and run away (all things that have been done with it). These are funny, endearing, and perfectly fine ways to interact with the sculpture (ok maybe except for the dildo one). On the other hand doing any of those things to the King Memorial would be completely inappropriate. This sculpture is dedicated to a person who was murdered, who fought for human rights, and deserves a level of respect people don't give to the Bean. With the King Memorial you can't put googly eyes on it, you can't take inappropriate pictures with it, you can't photoshop it dressed up like a ghost, and, god forbid, you can't stick a dildo on it and run away (that one could quite possibly be considered a hate crime). The people saying it'll be a tourist attraction just like the Chicago Bean are wrong. This sculpture will have to be treated with reverence. A picture of you flipping off the Chicago sculpture in its reflection is taken all the time because it is funny, a picture taken of you flipping off this one will have you seen as a bigot. I think a better analogy to the King Memorial would be the Holocaust Memorial in Berlin. A great sculptural idea, built for the selfie taking age, but it didn't take into account what would actually happen when people start taking selfies with it. There are now entire websites documenting inappropriate selfies people took there, or how people are putting pictures of themselves at the memorial as their dating profile pics. I don't think the issues will be quite as extreme as in Berlin, but I can totally see people making silly faces in the reflective surface, doing handstands against it, trying to hang thing or dangle off the fingers, or any number of other things that make for a good selfie but really seem inappropriate in the context of what the sculpture is for.

In summation...

This is Fun:

This is appalling:

Where will the King Memorial end up between these two extremes?

 

[stick n move]

I think the meme-ing that will happen here will be people taking selfies while hugging. I dont think anyone meant that it will be exactly like the bean, but that it will similarly have an interactive aspect to the art vs just viewing it like a sculpture on a pedestal. Also the interactive aspect is something big and reflective that you can walk up to and underneath vs just stand in front of. There are some glaring similarities and also some differences, as there should be.

 

[found5dollar]

@stick n move , I appreciate your optimism, but a giant statue of hands won't be having people hugging under it no matter what the renderings say. The pics people will take are lewd optical allusions where it looks like the hands are grabbing at body parts, people flashing hand gestures infront of the hands, and people making funny faces being reflected in the surface. None of these are appropriate for the memorial but it is just screaming for people to do it.

 

[shmessy]

@stick n move , I appreciate your optimism, but a giant statue of hands won't be having people hugging under it no matter what the renderings say. The pics people will take are lewd optical allusions where it looks like the hands are grabbing at body parts, people flashing hand gestures infront of the hands, and people making funny faces being reflected in the surface. None of these are appropriate for the memorial but it is just screaming for people to do it.

The hands are embracing each other, not reaching down to the pedestrians.

Perhaps I'm lacking the necessary imagination, but I'm having a hard time envisioning the contortions that would be necessary to affect a lewd pic relating to that particular scuplture.

 

[found5dollar]

The hands are embracing each other, not reaching down to the pedestrians.

Perhaps I'm lacking the necessary imagination, but I'm having a hard time envisioning the contortions that would be necessary to affect a lewd pic relating to that particular sculpture.

They are reaching up, and with a little bit of scale optical illusion it would be so easy to make it look like its about to grab someone's junk or chest. Do I need to do the photoshops? Im sure i cant be the only one seeign this as what is going to happen...

this view is the most egregious side...