It was back to the drawing board last month for sculptor Lei Yixin and the team charged with creating the Martin Luther King, Jr., memorial statue after the Federal Arts Commission said that their depiction of MLK — with his arms cross and a stern look on his face — was too "confrontational" and recalled "a genre of political sculpture that has recently been pulled down in other countries."
The team came back this week with a new version (on the far right), that pulls the granite forward a few inches. After the jump, see a photo of the face of the statue, which they altered by softening his brow and giving him a hint of a smile.
The softer, gentler (more deeply embedded in granite) MLK statue seems to gibe better with the softer, gentler, uncontroversial MLK in that lives in most Americans' minds. The truth, that one doesn't lead a non-violent movement against forces that are bigger, stronger, and more hateful with a constant slight smile and a gentle gaze, was clearly less desirable to the commission. I look at the statue and I don't see any drastic changes, and I might barely notice them if they weren't pointed out to me. But the sentiment behind the changes shows that the revolutionary side of MLK is not what the people want to see. The commission seems to have decided that the statue has been appropriately stripped of any icky and discomfiting signs of confrontational authority.
"I think that the improvements are very positive," said Earl A. Powell III, chair of the commission. "As a general concept, I'm very comfortable with it."
What do you think? Is it an improvement for the better or worse?
Interim Editor
Cord Jefferson Editorial Director
David Hauslaib Publisher
Jossip Initiatives
All Hip Hop
The Assimilated Negro
The B Life
Black Agenda Report
Black Male Appreciation
Black Prof
Black Voices
Bossip
Cake & Ice Cream
Clips and Kisses
Clutch Magazine
Concrete Loop
Crunk & Disorderly
Essence
EUR Web
The Fashion Bomb
Giant
Greasy Guide
Hip Candy
HipHopDX
Hip & Pop
Juicy News
King
Miss Info
Mollygood
My Urban Report
Nah Right
Necole Bitchie
Nova Slim
Panache Report
Racialicious
The Rap Up
Rhymes With Snitch
Sandra Rose
Shake Your Beauty
Straight Outta NYC
SOHH
TMZ
Vibe
Wendy Williams
XXL
Young, Black, Fabulous
I agree. I think the depiction of Dr. King's face is an improvement. The artist totally had him 'mean muggin' previously which I didn't like.
Martin Luther King has been hijacked and trivialized. I'm offended that he is now reduced to a single sentence in one speech. He gave many speechs and wrote many papers. Martin should never be portrayed as displeased? I don't agree with that, but then again I was born after the Civil Rights era. I was unaware that it was such a happy time that now, 40 years later, only happy images are allowed. He was a vocal critic of many policies and a practioner of civil disobedeance. I don't know how much smiling was required for that.
I see a drastic improvement! I think the changes no matter how small with the brow and the lips were critical. I guess Tyra was right about smiling with your eyes!
I think the improvements are great! But I will miss the idea of an angry black man giving you the "So Now What" look. Huey P. Is just a rolling in the ground.
Just wait, guys. Maybe the statue won't be so bad once it's 100% completed.
It's very important that we not scare the white folks with an angry black man statute. Puh-leeze! Anybody who stared down Bull Connor and company has a right not to smile. I haven't noticed that the statues of Lincoln and Washington got the smiley face treatment. And the Statute of Liberty is just freaking mean looking. But no, an unsmiling black man might give the wrong impression.
I don't like that they wanted to make him less controversial, but I do prefer the softer version, it just looks better. I'm glad he still has his arms folded though, because that's what I really liked about it to begin with. It makes me think "we will not be moved!" I'm gonna make my own MLK statue that has him throwing a bible at someone.
I prefer the 2nd version. It's not that I need to see him smiling; it's just that the first version doesn't look like him. But why we always gotta be cheesin? Are they cheesin' up on Mt. Rushmore? We're not clowns walking around all day with a smile on our face for their comfort and amusement. Sometimes we think… we get angry… we look sad… we are shy. They are amazing.
It's amazing how little changes can make a big difference.
I too got the "mean muggin" feel from the initial photo. He had power and passion. His anger came out in a constructive manner: action. I don't believe you'd find him scowling with arms folded like he's about to cuss somebody out.
Cosign with Daria.
I don't think the staue needs to be one of Dr. King shucking and Jiving but I don't recall seeing to many phots of him mean mugging and looking as if he is going to pop someone.
@J- The men of Mt. Rushmore are neither smiling or mean mugging.
@J- The men of Mt. Rushmore are neither smiling or mean mugging.
———
Well, we dont need to always be smiling, then either. We have a mission to accomplish in this society (and being Chris Rock aint it.)
He's not smiling in the new version. The first one shows a scowl. The second one shows a mostly neutral face.
I like the second one better two. It looks… hopeful. Like he has a dream, and he believes in that dream. He has the air of confidence combined with optimism.
I don't get smilin, shuckin, nor jivin, at all from that.
i think mlk has every right to look pissed off.
i think mlk has every right to look pissed off.
—-
You know? Being assassinated in the prime of life tends not to sit well with most people. smh
Why is it that people think a black person (especially a black man) looks "mean" and dangerous when they're not smiling? Why can't he just look serious?
I thought that the original statue was a better depiction of MLK. He seems pensive and powerful. I am also sad that they embedded him into the granite more. I think that his body language could have been changed, his arms changed in a more inviting manner to make him seem less like an "angry black man".
But let's be real, in the long run, I'm just glad they're making a statue for him- it's long overdue.
stokes: he's not smiling in the second one either. in the first one, he looks like he's scowling. you know what? there've been plenty of statues made of our "founding fathers" and other leaders. i can't thin of ONE that is scowling even though i can think of more than one with anger issues.
this isn't about Scary Black Man. please find me one picture of MLK in which he looks like he's about to pop somebody. i have never seen one. so why in the world should a statue of him feature this? if anything, this is about making a black leader into a dangerous, destructive man. this is how the feds saw him. it's how people, black and white, who were afraid of change saw him. yeah, he endangered the f-ed up way the status quo, but it wasn't destructive.
I like the second one for a lot of reasons. My guess is that MLK would have liked people to remember him as a pretty peaceful guy. Also, he looks more clear-eyed and confident now, too- like he's looking into the future with optimism.
And now he doesn't look so much like an angry socialist dictator. That was my real beef with the statue- it looked like something the Russians would have pulled down with ropes in 1990.
amazing improvement. before looked nothing like king. I wonder now in which direction will King be gazing when the statue is placed. Don't know if I want folded arms for generations to see.
I once was pulled into Human Resources for having folded arms. Was told it was challenging to authority. On second thought, keep the folded arms.