This is literally Boston's MLK statue, you have to see this to believe it.

[goatprairie]

Looks like someone hugging a big fat turd. 

 

Either that or someone with their head jammed up their rectum.
I defy anybody who hadn't been informed beforehand to know what the sculpture was supposed to represent.
Of course there's Henry Moore's equally ridiculous sculptures, so I guess the guy had a bad example to go by when he concocted this monstrosity.
Henry Moore "Reclining Figure"

[Smokin Joe]

The most segregated city in the US finally gets around to honoring King, and this is what they do?  Did they not consider reviewing the plan with the King family first?

Right. Seven years after schools (as ordered) had integrated, they were still burning school buses in Boston so their kids didn't have to go to school with 'those people' (1974)

[Wingnut]

GoFundMe Page Started To Help Complete MLK Statue.

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS — In honor of Dr. King and Coretta Scott King, artist Hank Thomas has unveiled a 20ft statue of the two hugging called the 'The Embrace'. Unfortunately, the artist was only able to afford to make a statue of their arms embracing and now a GoFundMe has been put together to raise money to complete the sculpture to include their heads and torsos.

According to the GoFundMe listing, with just $10 million they can add torsos, and with $10 million more they can sculpt their faces. The listing urgently requests everyone come together and help him finish this prematurely unveiled statue.

"PLEASE donate ASAP to complete this statue! Anything you can put towards this is greatly appreciated, as it helps it not look like I made a disrespectful sculpture of arms holding some kind of mysterious fleshy appendage," said artist Hank Thomas on the GoFundMe page. "With your contributions, we can finish my work and honor the great legacy of Martin Luther King Jr.."

"It's just hard in Biden's economy," added artist Hank Thomas. "Nowadays you can't even complete a simple sculpture with just $10 million dollars. The price of bronze has just skyrocketed beyond belief!"

At publishing time, GoFundMe announced that this was the fastest-ever fundraiser to hit its goal in the site's history as Americans of all races came together to finally make a beautiful piece of art to honor MLK Jr.

-From the Bee.

[verga]

Boston today is a joke. Whenever we visit (Mr. M runs the marathon most years), however, we think of the city's great history, visiting the graves of the early patriots, Bunker Hill, the Old North Church, and the like, as well as notable sites adjoining the Common.

This piece of crap plopped in the middle of an historic site is a travesty.

[mountaineer]

Babylon Bee:

Harriet Tubman Honored With Statue Of Her Left Big Toe
U.S. · Jan 16, 2023 · BabylonBee.com


AUBURN, NY — Following the new tradition of erecting disturbing modern-art monuments for prominent historical figures, the city of Auburn has unveiled a bronze statue of abolitionist and Underground Railroad leader Harriet Tubman's left big toe.

"We felt that this was a fitting tribute for the great Harriet Tubman," said Brandon Quezada, chairman of the city's Artistic Initiatives Committee. "Knowing that Boston was unveiling the unspeakably creepy ‘The Embrace' statue for Dr. Martin Luther King that bears a striking resemblance to various human organs mashed together in an ungodly chimeric abomination from the pit of hell, creating a monument depicting Ms. Tubman's left big toe and nothing else for some cryptic reason seemed like the right move." ...

[Kamaji]

Babylon Bee:

[DefiantMassRINO]

The statue is indecipherable, ugly, and being nick-named "dong" for its resemblemce to a phallus.

[verga]

30+ years ago for "Juneteenth" a statue of MLK was erected. It bore no resemblance to him at all. Thew atist excuse was that it was supposed to be every man of African American descent. I laughed. Cheap excuse from someone that could not sculpt.

[mountaineer]

Pedro L. Gonzalez
@emeriticus
Jan 17
I published an article on MLK Day about how King was a communist-backed serial adulterer who laid the foundations of DEI and CRT. It really upset people. One person said I should be shot dead in front of my family.
So, I published another one today.

One More Swing at the King
Like MLK Day, the hulk now casting a gnarly shadow over Boston symbolizes America’s national humiliation and the victory of a totalitarian regime.
Pedro L. Gonzalez
Jan 17

A common criticism against the left amid its feverish campaign to pull down one monument after another is that it is incapable of building and that its path of destruction across the country has all the thoughtfulness of a tornado ripping through a suburb. But that is really more like comfort food for thought than fact—and the fact is that these people are building something. Just because it’s hideous to us doesn’t change that or stop its coming. After all, the whole point of a good old-fashioned iconoclasm is to cultivate intolerance toward the old gods and pave the way for new overlords with the demolition of symbols that represent the outgoing regime.

This winter, indeed, is pregnant with such symbolism. As the last city-owned Confederate statue dedicated to a general named Ambrose Powell Hill Jr. in Richmond, Virginia, came down in December, a new monument honoring Martin Luther King, Jr. reared its ugly head at the Freedom Plaza of the Boston Common in January. In a previous column, I argued that the $10 million bronze behemoth is as hideous as King’s real legacy as a communist-backed serial adulterer and overall moral reprobate. But it is worth reflecting on that new sculpture and contrasting it to the one that was recently plucked from the public eye.

Like MLK Day, the hulk now casting a gnarly shadow over Boston symbolizes America’s national humiliation and the victory of a totalitarian regime. This is an important point that people often miss: the toppling of Confederate monuments is not about South versus North; it is about shaming America and specifically disconnecting white Americans from their history as descendants of the people primarily responsible for finding, settling, and building this country. “For many white Americans, particularly outside the South,” wrote Christopher Caldwell in The Age of Entitlement, MLK Day “marked not the end but the beginning of shame, of an official culture that cast their country’s history as one of oppression, and its ideals of liberty as hypocrisies.” ...

Entire article at Substack

[mountaineer]

Here's the first article Pedro Gonzalez mentioned:

MLK's Hideous Legacy
Remembering Reverend King for who he really was.
Pedro L. Gonzalez
Jan 16

January 1964. The historic Willard Hotel, on Pennsylvania Avenue, just east of the White House. A group of men, including some ministers, gather in a room with young female parishioners. They discuss which of the women would be suitable for various sex acts, each more debased than the last. When one of the girls raises her voice in disapproval at the talk, a Baptist minister forcibly rapes her as another minister of the gospel “looked on, laughed and offered advice.”

The man who laughed was Martin Luther King Jr., according to author and historian David Garrow. Nine months after that alleged rape, on October 14, 1964, King was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Ahead of MLK Day this year, Boston unveiled a monument with all the aesthetic charm of a malignant tumor that represents the hug King shared with his wife, Coretta Scott King, after winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964. Some of King’s fans have lamented its appearance, but its grotesqueness accords well with the hideousness of his real legacy, which you won’t find with any ease these days, and for a good reason: King’s hagiography is integral to the mythos that rationalizes the incumbent political order; whether something is good or bad depends on whether it is closer to or further from King’s ostensibly color-blind “dream.” But it, like his official biography, hides the rot beneath a mawkish veneer of moral decency.

King was more than a sexual predator. He inaugurated the age of anti-whiteness and the “diversity, equity, and inclusion” regime. He supported affirmative action and racial quotas, contrary to conservative fairytales that cling to King’s blather about character over skin color. He gladly accepted help from known communists and was, in fact, funded by them. But it is the moral bankruptcy evinced by his adultery that sets the stage for reckoning with the rest. Plutarch wrote that he “must have his own house in good order who undertakes to order the affairs of his friends and the public,” for “ill-doings on the part of husbands to their wives” will eventually come to light and call all the rest into question. ...

https://contra.substack.com/p/mlks-hideous-legacy

[jafo2010]

The UGLY TRUTH is just that TRUTH.  I have worked with many women that are black, and every one of them, no exception, that I got to know well, every one of them had a husband at one time in their life that screwed anything in a skirt.  They grew tired of the infidelity, and every last one ended divorced.  Black men do not comprehend the concept of monogamy.  They don't have the slightest clue.

Now to be fair, my observations of human behavior indicate that most men who are white also are well acquainted with infidelity.  But the fact is, I know many white men, Asian men, that are monogamous. 

MLK was cozy with the communists.  Absolutely plausible when you consider the government he was protesting was doing everything they could to undermine his efforts.  King wanted equality, and the establishment of the day just could not fathom that desire.

And over time, this man has been elevated to super human status, when in reality, he was a stereotypical black man screwing everything in a skirt.  But hey, another three letter notable was no different, JFK.  Secret Service ushered one woman after another in and out of the White House for his bedroom pleasures.  One man was heralded and the other accosted with every step.  Both were executed by a government that was more powerful than they should have been.

That power today has grown one hundred fold.  Who runs this country today?  No one that should!!!

[mountaineer]

By Discarding Religion And Tradition, Modern Art Turns Men Into Morlocks
The new sculpture of Dr. and Mrs. King’s arms isn’t about race, art, or politics. It’s about whether we want to be human.
By: Nathan Stone
January 23, 2023

Pilate asked Christ, “What is truth?” Today, the question would be, “What is art?” Whatever the answer, it is not Hank Willis Thomas’ new monument to Dr. Martin Luther and Mrs. Coretta Scott King.

Entitled “The Embrace,” the statue consists of two pairs of arms embracing each other — apparently, MLK and Mrs. King’s after the former had won the Noble Peace Prize — and nothing else. That would be disturbing enough. That the statue looks like a male appendage from certain angles only makes it worse. Not that this stopped Thomas from defending his monstrosity.

“I think about the potential of The Embrace to be an inspiration for what monuments of the 21st century will look like … there has been a reckoning and conversation about what’s been done in the past, but really, we’re looking at the past as a gateway to the future,” the artist insisted.

Some people were shocked at the statue’s unveiling, but nothing should shock us anymore, in politics or culture. ...

Art allows us to become familiar with the transcendent, but this can manifest as either heaven or hell. The work of Hank Willis Thomas and his comrades, brutalist architecture, and the recently released film “Babylon” are all designed to surround us with Dante’s “Inferno.” By manifesting ugliness, hopelessness, and the creeds of wokeness in every museum, public space, and park (after removing actual heroes), the plan is to devolve us from man to Morlock, something subhuman which, because it has been deprived of beauty for so long, no longer has an understanding of it and can no longer treasure it, let alone appreciate it. Which, eventually, will lead us to accept the regime’s understanding of what is beautiful and good without question.   ...

Read entire article at The Federalist

[Fishrrman]

Title and presumption:
"Modern Art Turns Men Into Morlocks"

Pshaw...
There's an entire cohort of the population that has turned themselves into Morlocks -- no coaxing from modern art was necessary.

[goatprairie]

I'll repeat what I've said many times before. Modern/abstract art was created by 20th century inferior artists who realized that they could never match the artistic wonders of the artists and sculptors of previous centuries. They then concocted "modern" art to fool the suckers.  They were abetted and promoted by sick art critics who wanted to get in on the scam.
Tom Wolfe exposed a lot of the idiots in his book "The Painted Word," but the crap still gets bought and sold by the suckers.

[verga]

I'll repeat what I've said many times before. Modern/abstract art was created by 20th century inferior artists who realized that they could never match the artistic wonders of the artists and sculptors of previous centuries. They then concocted "modern" art to fool the suckers.  They were abetted and promoted by sick art critics who wanted to get in on the scam.
Tom Wolfe exposed a lot of the idiots in his book "The Painted Word," but the crap still gets bought and sold by the suckers.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I'll repeat what I've said many times before. Modern/abstract art was created by 20th century inferior artists who realized that they could never match the artistic wonders of the artists and sculptors of previous centuries. They then concocted "modern" art to fool the suckers.  They were abetted and promoted by sick art critics who wanted to get in on the scam.
Tom Wolfe exposed a lot of the idiots in his book "The Painted Word," but the crap still gets bought and sold by the suckers.

Exactly, this guy was just a shitty sculptor and covered it up with this hands crap.

[Kamaji]

I'll repeat what I've said many times before. Modern/abstract art was created by 20th century inferior artists who realized that they could never match the artistic wonders of the artists and sculptors of previous centuries. They then concocted "modern" art to fool the suckers.  They were abetted and promoted by sick art critics who wanted to get in on the scam.
Tom Wolfe exposed a lot of the idiots in his book "The Painted Word," but the crap still gets bought and sold by the suckers.

Not completely true.  There are examples of modern art that are quite good; however, it is true that modern art, like modern architecture, is particularly prone to being abused by grifters and incompetents who pass off unskilled crap as "modernism" that's just misunderstood.

[mountaineer]

We're  in Boston today and had the opportunity to see this work of art (cough cough). It's as ridiculous as we suspected.

 

[Cyber Liberty]

We're  in Boston today and had the opportunity to see this work of art (cough cough). It's as ridiculous as we suspected.

 

So the photos do it justice?  It's really this bad....

[mountaineer]

Yes, it's as bad as the photos portray.

[Wingnut]

Yes, it's as bad as the photos portray.

You had a turdseye view of it then.

[libertybele]

Yes, it's as bad as the photos portray.

It is absolutely horrendous! 

[libertybele]

I think it tops the monument to Joe Louis near Hart Plaza in Detroit.  We were fortunate  enough to see it up close.

[goatprairie]

Not completely true.  There are examples of modern art that are quite good; however, it is true that modern art, like modern architecture, is particularly prone to being abused by grifters and incompetents who pass off unskilled crap as "modernism" that's just misunderstood.

I guess it depends a lot on how you view artists like Picasso the so-called originator or popularizer of modern art. Or Marcel Duchamp's "Nude Descending A Staircase" caused a riot when first exhibited. Both Picasso and Duchamp employed "cubism" the blocky looking/angular stuff they're known by.
If you like that, good for you. I hate that stuff.  Both Picasso and Duchamp were obviously very talented, but what they produced as "art" is not what I consider great art. I would not have anything they did on the walls in my house. I'd love to have one of their paintings of course. Because I would sell it  fast for a very large bundle.
Now Georgia O'Keefe, who is considered a modernist, I like a lot. But you can recognize most of what she painted. She didn't do Jackson Pollack daubs on canvas. Poilack's "art" is what I despise.

[catfish1957]

I guess it depends a lot on how you view artists like Picasso the so-called originator or popularizer of modern art. Or Marcel Duchamp's "Nude Descending A Staircase" caused a riot when first exhibited. Both Picasso and Duchamp employed "cubism" the blocky looking/angular stuff they're known by.
If you like that, good for you. I hate that stuff.  Both Picasso and Duchamp were obviously very talented, but what they produced as "art" is not what I consider great art. I would not have anything they did on the walls in my house. I'd love to have one of their paintings of course. Because I would sell it  fast for a very large bundle.
Now Georgia O'Keefe, who is considered a modernist, I like a lot. But you can recognize most of what she painted. She didn't do Jackson Pollack daubs on canvas. Poilack's "art" is what I despise.

I've bought modern Texas and Western realism originals the past 15 years, and have made out pretty nicely on what I'd see in the secondary market.  Love buying directly from these artists, as like musical composers, their minds and mental planes operate on a different tier than the rest of us  .  I'd just love to be able to paint like them.  I swear some of these look like photographs, but are true oils.    But Me?....... I am lucky to draw a legible dog if pressed.   

I agree with a lot of your take on art.  I understand Picasso, but do not understand how he has reached that rank among his peers, considering.  I think the Impressionist stuff from Renoir' and Monet' is much more appealing as it applies to art. Their ability to approximate and blur reality, especially in the new age of photography was awesome. 

I very much love the 16th-17th century European realist art too, but have avoided that market because of it is so rife with fraud, and art in that period is so hard to authenicate and get provenance. All the experts are over there, so a No Go for me.  And apparently I am not the only one, because when you look at auctions, you can find supposed authenic pieces of listed artists of  that time frame in the $2-5K dollar range.

And to your comment about Jackson Pollock?  When I was a kid, I remember  an episode of Beverly Hillbillies where Elly May's Chimp splatted aimlessly on a canvas, and a so called pointy headed expert raved about the ability of the artist.  That's all I got to say about the compentencies of Drip Expressionist.