Artists

appalachiablue

(42,819 posts) Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:28 PM Jul 2021

'An awkward, lifeless shrine - the Diana, Princess of Wales statue is a spiritless hunk of nonsense'

Last edited Sat Jul 3, 2021, 08:48 PM - Edit history (1)

The Guardian, July 1, 2021. The only provocative thing about Ian Rank-Broadley’s characterless sculpture is how shamelessly it plays up to mawkish Diana worship

Ian Rank-Broadley’s statue of Diana, commissioned by her sons, was kept secret until its unveiling as if it might be wildly provocative. Looking through the artist’s previous oeuvre, I noticed he has a taste for the nude and created a statue for the late Felix Dennis called Lord Rochester, His Whore and a Monkey. That raised the fascinating prospect of a naked Diana for everyone to get furious about.

Instead, he’s let it all hang out in a different way. The sentiment splurges across the flower beds like an uncontrolled wail of artistically absurd pathos. A larger than life Diana, who stands in an awkward, stiff, lifeless pose and has a face that’s more manly than I remember, modelled apparently with thickly gloved hands and no photo to consult, protects two children in her arms while a third lurks behind her.

This sculpture invites us to see Diana as a modern Mary – and they say they don’t want it to be a shrine?

It is a religious image that shamelessly plays up to the most mawkish aspects of Diana worship. She deserves to be remembered. But does she need to be turned into a colossal divine protectress of all children? If that is how Harry and William think of her that’s up to them. But this looks like the art of a new religion. For the maternal shielding blatantly echoes one of the greatest images of the Virgin Mary in Christian art, by Piero della Francesca, of the holy mother protecting an entire community under her robe. Even without that specific allusion the image of mother and child has been a Catholic mainstay for over a millennium and before that featured in Egyptian religious art. So this sculpture invites us to see Diana as a modern Mary, or even Isis with her son Horus. And they say they don’t want it to be a shrine?

It will be, but not for art lovers. Or for anyone who is easily embarrassed. Perhaps not even for Diana’s sincerest believers, for the statue group’s emotive symbolism is undermined by its aesthetic awfulness. In style it breathes the kind of repression and formality which Harry has claimed to reject. Are we sure Charles had no hand here? It looks like his insipid artistic taste. Flat, cautious realism softened by a vague attempt to be intimate make this a spiritless and characterless hunk of nonsense...

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/jul/01/the-diana-statue-ian-rank-broadley-sculpture
________

*ETA: 'Diana deserved better': Critics savage 'frumpy' new statue,' Yahoo,
https://news.yahoo.com/art-critics-round-statue-princess-diana-102239176.html

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

'An awkward, lifeless shrine - the Diana, Princess of Wales statue is a spiritless hunk of nonsense' (Original Post) appalachiablue Jul 2021 OP

LOL wryter2000 Jul 2021 #1

I fixed it, the title. The statue is fairly appalachiablue Jul 2021 #2

I am an artist and the first thing so thought FalloutShelter Jul 2021 #3

Where to begin, the proportions of all appalachiablue Jul 2021 #5

Totally agree. But if her sons are happy with it, I guess there is that. nt spooky3 Jul 2021 #8

I was disappointed, too. It seems to lack emotion. Joinfortmill Jul 2021 #4

Very disappointing, you're correct. And appalachiablue Jul 2021 #6

She's not in this statue.... secondwind Jul 2021 #10

I like it. nt Mosby Jul 2021 #7

I do too. Wingus Dingus Jul 2021 #14

HER ARMS!!! secondwind Jul 2021 #9

IK, what an amateur portrayal...ugh appalachiablue Jul 2021 #12

They're as lifeless as department store mannequins. An insult. Duncan Grant Jul 2021 #11

Dept. store mannequin is right.. cloddish appalachiablue Jul 2021 #13

I told you I like faces. But geez. LakeArenal Jul 2021 #15

cant really say from pics provided, need some closeups nt msongs Jul 2021 #16

There's a brief video ABOVE now in the OP appalachiablue Jul 2021 #18

That's what I call a hatchet job! lunatica Jul 2021 #17

Some of it OTT, he's really reaching w appalachiablue Jul 2021 #19

wryter2000

(47,332 posts)

1. LOL

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:30 PM

Jul 2021

I thought they meant the goddess Diana.

appalachiablue

(42,819 posts)

2. I fixed it, the title. The statue is fairly

Reply to wryter2000 (Reply #1)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:34 PM

Jul 2021

dreadful artistically. What a letdown.

FalloutShelter

(12,712 posts)

3. I am an artist and the first thing so thought

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:35 PM

Jul 2021

when I saw this monument to mawkishness was... WOW how awkward and sort of ugly.

appalachiablue

(42,819 posts)

5. Where to begin, the proportions of all

Reply to FalloutShelter (Reply #3)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:41 PM

Jul 2021

three figures are extra elongated and weird, esp. the childrens' bodies. They couldn't even capture her pleasant, beautiful face and graceful long form made for art.

Clumsy, rough and degrading to her memory.

spooky3

(36,021 posts)

8. Totally agree. But if her sons are happy with it, I guess there is that. nt

Reply to appalachiablue (Reply #5)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:54 PM

Jul 2021

Joinfortmill

(16,330 posts)

4. I was disappointed, too. It seems to lack emotion.

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:39 PM

Jul 2021

appalachiablue

(42,819 posts)

6. Very disappointing, you're correct. And

Reply to Joinfortmill (Reply #4)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:43 PM

Jul 2021

it lacks warmth, empathy and joy which defined Diana.

secondwind

(16,903 posts)

10. She's not in this statue....

Reply to appalachiablue (Reply #6)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 01:08 PM

Jul 2021

Mosby

(17,314 posts)

7. I like it. nt

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 12:48 PM

Jul 2021

Wingus Dingus

(8,399 posts)

14. I do too.

Reply to Mosby (Reply #7)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 01:26 PM

Jul 2021

secondwind

(16,903 posts)

9. HER ARMS!!!

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 01:08 PM

Jul 2021

Can they be any LONGER???

appalachiablue

(42,819 posts)

12. IK, what an amateur portrayal...ugh

Reply to secondwind (Reply #9)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 01:19 PM

Jul 2021

Duncan Grant

(8,475 posts)

11. They're as lifeless as department store mannequins. An insult.

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 01:19 PM

Jul 2021

As someone remembered as vibrant, original and beautiful — this is a total and complete failure.

This sculpture should be breathtakingly modern and relevant. It’s not. It’s dead, static and meaningless.

I hate bad art.

appalachiablue

(42,819 posts)

13. Dept. store mannequin is right.. cloddish

Reply to Duncan Grant (Reply #11)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 01:21 PM

Jul 2021

and certainly not 'art' befitting the subject.

LakeArenal

(29,740 posts)

15. I told you I like faces. But geez.

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 01:31 PM

Jul 2021

She’s so manly.

She had grace and charm totally lacking.

She should be sitting or kneeling by a child with limbs missing from mines or a child with aids. That’s how I remember with children.

Otherwise she should look elegant and fashionable.

msongs

(70,086 posts)

16. cant really say from pics provided, need some closeups nt

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 04:56 PM

Jul 2021

appalachiablue

(42,819 posts)

18. There's a brief video ABOVE now in the OP

Reply to msongs (Reply #16)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 06:56 PM

Jul 2021

Not too much more of the Diana statue but better than the photo.

lunatica

(53,410 posts)

17. That's what I call a hatchet job!

Reply to appalachiablue (Original post)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 05:24 PM

Jul 2021

That critique could have been softened considerably had the person put themself in the shoes of the Diana worshippers.

And why go the extra length to trash Charles and the boys? Really unnecessary and uncalled for.

appalachiablue

(42,819 posts)

19. Some of it OTT, he's really reaching w

Reply to lunatica (Reply #17)

Sat Jul 3, 2021, 08:33 PM

Jul 2021

the Virgin Mary, Piero della Francesa references and the snarky personal treatment. When the story came out a few days ago I was focused on the statue, and got lazy taking this article for my final post last night.

The BBC didn't do much better, the intro. to their video focused entirely on the rift between Harry and Charles, and how members of the Spencer family and other notables at the event were getting along despite tensions. The Daily Mail wasn't so great either.
______________

The statue has received a considerable amount of criticism,
https://news.yahoo.com/art-critics-round-statue-princess-diana-102239176.html

Art critics have labelled the new statue of Diana "horrible", "flat" and "spiritless" as they say the late princess "deserved better".

Prince William and Prince Harry united on Thursday afternoon to unveil a long-awaited statue of their mother, who was killed in a car crash in Paris in 1997.

The brothers announced plans for a permanent memorial for her in 2017 as they marked 20 years since her death. But the statue has been delayed, in part by coronavirus restrictions.

Rachel Campbell-Johnston, The Times chief art critic, said the statue featured a "frumpy 1980s outfit", calling the skirt "sedate" and suggesting "Laura Ashley has made it on to a public monument". She said: "The new Diana statue has a devotional aura. Perhaps this is (what those who) worshipped the princess would want...

Reply to this discussion