MLK Memorial (statue) to be redisigned, causing discussion among Black Blogosphere
Categories: African-American, Ruth at Vibrant Life
Written By: Shawn Williams
I’m happy to announce a third contributor to Dallas South, this time a blogger. Ruth from Vibrant Life will post here from time to time. For her first post, Ruth is discussing something near and dear to my heart: The Martin Luther King Memorial.
Near and dear because dear old A Phi A initiated the memorial and I’ve put quite a few dollars into the project over the years. I hope you enjoy Ruth’s take as much as I did, and please welcome her to the Dallas South family!
The Washington Post story and photos have black blog-sphere discussing the current controversy 
surrounding Dr. MLK Jr’s proposed statute design by Chinese master sculptor Lei Yixin. The commission which by law must approve the final design describes it as too confrontational. This term has generated an initial reaction of criticism from blacks suggesting that only a less threatening image of Dr. King will satisfy a white audience. I really do not agree with that theory.
First, sorry call me a protectionist, but I do have a problem with the idea that once again we are “outsourcing” something to China. Recognizing that Dr. King’s mission changed not only our nation but thus the world - he certainly championed American workers of all stripes but could we not pay homage to him through the talent of an American artist? Some say that perspective is bigoted - not intended so sorry if that is the take away. Also, in fairness, keeping in mind that our best known statue is likely the Statute of Liberty - a gift from France - I have no idea who designed the other monuments in Washington.
Regarding the design - sorry but it does not capture the spirit of Dr. King’s legacy. Some are tripping up over the commission’s term “confrontational” with the man emerging from stone and folded arms. That is not what bothers me - humility is not a sign of weakness in the message of the Gospel - bearing in mind Dr. King never sat aside that he was a minister of God first and foremost. This image does not reflect humility. When I think of the greatness of Dr. King’s message it was that he helped to generate so much change through peaceful - intelligent - challenge for change. Certainly he had no problem with standing on the frontline and spending many nights in jail. But it was not done with an air of arrogance, which this image projects.
We each take away from common history that which speaks to us most. For some it was his community organizing skills, for many it was his oratory skills and ability to move a nation beyond their fears to their humanity, for me it was his ability to combine those forces. He crafted a movement that inspired the working men and women to risk their lives, while through his intellect he moved the white community beyond their fears and comfort with the status quo. He spoke with such authenticity to both audiences that he was able to help them find common ground. Dare I say, and you knew I would have to mention our friend, that is part of the appeal of the presumptive Democratic party nominee, Senator Barack Obama.
On a side note, I must say that the image of his features are a good representation.
To return to the discussion regarding the Chinese designer some have suggested the image reflects a persona more common with totalitarian ideals and even reminds them of Lenin. Perhaps the designer is influenced, though he is in exile for speaking out about his country’s policies I believe, by the political climate of his homeland. But I believe Dr. King’s character was attacked enough in that area in life, and I would not want a design selected that would reopen that debate.
Sadly I cannot draw a tree…LOL…no I really can’t. So it is not my place to lecture someone with great talent but to advise the decision makers to remember this is a man who looms very large today even among those of us too young to know Dr. King beyond videos and written speeches. They will never satisfy everyone, but I think a great deal of people can agree - the current design is not the right direction.
May 10th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
MLK was probably the most intellectual of American heroes. Who else memorialized on the Mall has a doctorate?
In that sense, I can see why the committee is probably going to eventually force the sculpture into something more like Rodin’s “Thinker”. Something evoking his peacemaker/philosopher/orator reputation. Nothing necessarily wrong with that.
However, given the deep level of anti-intellectualism in American culture, and the fact that an educated, nonviolent negro like MLK represented the worst fears of the white establishment, I think the “stern” look of the current iteration definitely represents MLK’s legacy–striving to make America wake up to our racial problems, and reminding us into the 21st century that we have not yet reached the promised land. It’s defiant and edgy, just like MLK was. He was a peacemaker, and he advocated nonviolence, but he would have settled for nothing but our best.
Finally, he was not some gentle soul who quietly passed away in his sleep of old age after accomplishing a lifetime of work. His life was cut brutally short at a young age by an assassin’s bullet, like so many great, great people of that time. We must remember the hope and promise of the 60s, and a statue of MLK in a more defiant, stern pose would shock us into realizing how much times have changed in his absence.
May 10th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
The problem with the statue, I believe, is its heavy communist/soviet influences. I have lived in China for a few years now, and I would be very distressed to find a memorial of Dr. King with such resemblances to the images of Mao I see everywhere. Yes, Dr. King was defiant and stern, but I think there must be a better way to represent him than the Chinese design.
A more fitting monument would be a statue of him sitting in his reflective pose, with his hand resting in his cheek and his index finger resting on his temple, as he used to do, but with the other hand holding firm the chair’s armrest, and his body ready to stand up, ready to act, ready to march.
The contours of the statue should not sharp, even though he was, but round, for he was a humanist, and he was against us forgetting that the fight for justice never ends, that the fight for what is right never ends, and that immortalizing a man would make us forget that the courage he had is within us as well.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Fidel, didn’t you post the same comment somewhere else? I might as well do the same thing:
We common people need to make sure the Commission is not emasculating the “confrontational” idea that people should be treated as equal regardless of race. The establishment has always been itching to slap the label “controversial” to anything they perceive as threatful to their agenda, and definitely nothing short of having an “MLK-Lite” image (think Desmond Tutu) will appease them.
They can’t stomach the thought of having a monumental image of a strong black man stare down the national monuments of slaveowners with their hypocritical rantings they call “Bill of Rights”. I might be fantasizing, but this single “confrontational” image might just be the antidote to the poisonous crunk, hyphy, gangsta, nigglature images we all have been dying from.
The Commission knew this and would fight to the bitter end. They can’t even accept an image of him emerging from the stone. He has to still be trapped in the stone. Don’t get trapped in the “totalitarian” or “outsourcing” argument. They are afraid of the “revolutionary” aspect of this image.
Sincerely
Someone concerned about our image