Byron Williams Winston-Salem Journal
I became aware of the controversy surrounding the unveiling of the sculpture titled, “The Embrace,” while at dinner with friends. A woman seated behind me vehemently offered, at a high-decibel level, her disappointment at the sculpture that emphasized the love between Martin Luther King and his wife Coretta Scott King.
Watching the actual unveiling online and the reaction of the thousands on hand, largely displaying their approval, told me nothing. I then conducted a search on the internet, a reliable harbinger of truth, and discovered a plethora of pseudo art critics offering their dismay of the “statue of Martin Luther King in Boston.”
Therein lies a portion of the problem; it was a sculpture. A statue is a carved or cast figure of an individual. Conversely, a sculpture is art that appears in representative or abstract forms.
“The Embrace,” which is based on a photo of Coretta and Martin upon receiving the news that he had won the 1964 Nobel Peace Prize, became the vision of sculptor Hank Willis Thomas. It was an homage to the love that began in Boston where the civil rights icons met in 1952.
People are also reading…
Those not at the unveiling allowed photos of the sculpture taken from particular camera angles to support their opposition. Some saw a penis, others claimed they saw oral copulation, and some offered the lack of faces as a systematic attempt to “whitewash” the legacy of Martin Luther King.
When did immediate reactionary critiques from the comforts and conveniences of one’s laptop or smartphone of something that was years in the making suffice as thoughtful commentary?
Seneca Scott, a cousin of Coretta, claimed “The Embrace” was insulting to his family, describing it as “a masturbatory metal homage.” One can only assume Scott was referring to his immediate family because Coretta Scott King’s son (Martin Luther King III), daughter in law and granddaughter, all of whom were in attendance, unlike Scott, did not find the sculpture objectionable.
Too bad the energy to oppose “The Embrace” isn’t replicated when it comes to following the legacy blazed by Coretta and Martin Luther King. Theirs was not an occasional public outcry to the injustice de jour, but a sustained effort to eradicate public policies that ignore the human dignity of those on the margin.
Lest we forget, Martin Luther King was assassinated in Memphis advocating for the dignity of sanitation workers. And it was Coretta Scott King, continuing and, in some cases, expanding the work of her spouse seeing LGBTQ equality as the logical extension of the civil rights movement of the 1960s:
“My husband, Martin Luther King, Jr., once said, ‘We are all tied together in a single garment of destiny … an inescapable network of mutuality.’ Therefore, I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King’s dream to make room at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people.”
Shouldn’t there be sustained anger, not toward the artists’ vision for a sculpture, wrongly depicted as a statue, but rather that the price demanded for the King holiday include that he be defanged and domesticated? America does not grant holidays for prophets, at least not in their original form. Prophets are not spokespersons for cheeseburgers, computers, luxury watches and pickup trucks.
Why are misappropriations of King’s words and actions not an ongoing source of outrage? Self-righteous indignation, notwithstanding, the whitewashing of King is a daily phenomenon – sometimes conducted by those who claim to be in his tradition.
It’s not enough to demonstrate outrage about a piece of art, while clinging to the avatar commonly referred to as Martin Luther King.
To examine the totality of the art based on a portion of a photo that allows for a salacious critique, is fodder for comedians, but hardly the basis for a substantive observation. Would a photo of the left sleeve taken from the Mona Lisa offer an accurate portrayal?
There is nothing wrong with not liking the sculpture. One person can see “The Embrace” as symbolizing the love between Coretta and Martin and the injustice they fought against, while others are free to view it through a less intellectual lens.
Although ultimately subjective, art interpretation requires that we look at the same thing prior to rendering a reactionary critique based on internet photos. Alas, it’s been a long time since our public discourse displayed that type of maturity.
Byron Williams
.