The Abysmal Mary Wollstonecraft Statue
Mary Wollstonecraft, the ‘mother of feminism’ and the woman whose philosophy was instrumental in getting women in Britain the right to be educated on par with men, was finally ‘honoured’ with a statue today. I say ‘honoured’ in inverted commas because, was it really an honour?
I think not.
The statue is the first ever made of Wollstonecraft and was unveiled in London after a ten-year campaign to raise funds for the new landmark. Designed by the sometimes controversial artist Maggi Hambling, the sculpture features a naked lady at the top of a female-body-part-silhouetted silvered bronze stand, and bears no resemblance to Wollstonecraft, who died in 1797 shortly after the birth of her daughter, novelist Mary Shelley, whatsoever.
A Vindication of the Rights of Woman is Wollstonecraft’s most profound work. It argued, for one of the first times in British philosophical history, that a woman’s education is just as important as a man’s. Of course, her views were quashed by the misogyny of the time, but not completely. Suffragist Millicent Fawcett — whose own statue was erected in Parliament Square for the first time in 2018 — often cited Wollstonecraft’s work and indeed helped to restore the philosopher’s reputation.
But what on earth has happened with this raunchy naked statue unveiled today? A woman who lived throughout the 1700s being depicted naked in the first ever statue unveiled of her makes no sense. It’s cheap and it’s ugly — and it’s a disservice.
I am no prude and I do not care if women want to be naked. Whatever makes you happy, ladies. But I think it speaks volumes when we are now attempting to sexualise one of the greatest feminist philosophers in history. And for what purpose? It bears no relevance to Wollstonecraft’s work that she is naked, so I struggle to understand the rationale behind it.
Perhaps most puzzling of all is that Wollstonecraft is not even recognisable atop of the ugly, cheap-looking silver podium. It’s a thin, beach body ready naked woman with some perky breasts. How would anyone know it’s supposedly a statue of famous women’s rights philosopher Mary Wollstonecraft? They wouldn’t. Though I presume there’s a plaque underneath — and I hope so — or it’ll become just another sculpted naked woman.
There are so many ways Wollstonecraft could have been depicted in a statue. The Millicent Fawcett one is a great example, even showing words from one of her speeches front and centre. Yet this one of beloved Mary Wollstonecraft is just baffling.
Surely we agree that it’s inappropriate to put a woman from the context of the 1700s into the context of 2020? Wollstonecraft would probably be mortified that she’s been perched naked on a statue for all to see. Though I imagine she’ll find some comfort (and amusement) in knowing that it looks nothing like her anyway.
