Read on Twitter
"Sure stick a Barbie on top of it and tell them it's a women's monument". https://twitter.com/Jackcantsleep1/status/1326135132449693697
If it was in Ireland it would already have a nickname like “Sindy on the Windy.”
Duplicating comments here: but can you imagine the row if you'd had this sculpture with a naked Nelson Mandela Barbie "rising up out of the morass of apartheid" or a chubby naked Churchill "rising up out of the Second World War"?
"Oh but it's not meant to be LITERALLY Mary," they scoff! "It's a general IDEA about WIMMIN rising UP from..." - well, from what? Is this Mary's body? Clearly not. Is it her face? Apparently not. So why do male historical figures get statues representing THEM and females not?
Why. Isn't. It. A. Statue. Of. Mary. Wollstonecraft?
If it's a statue about "de feminism" well, fine. If it's a statue OF Mary Wollstonecraft, why is it a naked Barbie on top of a volcano meant to represent "all women" or something?
Why does everything about "de wimmin" need to represent all sorts of amorphous nonsense about "de wimmin"? Can't a female historical figure not have a goddam statue to herself?
Churchill doesn't get "rEpREsEnTeD in aBsTrAcT fashion in a work that's more GeNeRaLlY about WaR." Well, he might, but not in State-funded "actual plinth" stuff. In fact, he was so displeased with a rather real (though modern) depiction of himself in paint that Clemmie burned it.
Indulge me. Can we please imagine a list of historical figures that we'd plonk, NAKED, Barbie-sized, on top of that sculpture, and what the reaction would be?
- Charles Stewart Parnell, willy swinging in the breeze (Irish Home Rule rising out of the morass of English governance)
- Charles Stewart Parnell, willy swinging in the breeze (Irish Home Rule rising out of the morass of English governance)
- Edmund Burke, shlong wobbling with the wind (modern Conservatism rising out of the complexities of 18th century revolutionary fervour)
- Alexander Hamilton, goolies galore (rising out of post-war chaos to put order on a new, optimistic Constitution)
Isambard Kingdom Brunel, pot belly displayed to the world, genitals on show, rising up out of the pre-industrial world to Victorian efficiency.
George Washington, standing proud (if a little skinny) with "Little George" standing to attention, rising up out of the chaos of the War of Independence to form the United States of America.
Give me a f**ing break. Any of the above-mentioned statues would be torn down as "disrespectful". So why is it okay to represent Mary Wollstonecraft as an anonymous nuddy-pants Barbie staked into an amorphous blob?
WHY is it about ANY woman's BODY rather than ONE WOMAN'S MIND, you absolute pile of numpties?
