‘There was a culturally significant silence- an intake of breath- when ‘The Statue of a Human Man’ and ‘The Statue of a Human Woman’ appeared in the streets of Boston, bringing to end a year’s anticipation of the event. Early previews consisted entirely of interviews with the artist, well-known sculptor Steven Lock, who talked at length about the difficulties of distilling the universality of what it means to be human into two images. Guesses as to the final shape of these installations ran the gamut but most agreed they would be abstract, by default, and likely ironic. Two identical lumps of copper, maybe, or deeply intricate renderings of male and female reproductive systems. One popular theory suggested Lock would install mirrors, allowing viewers to recognize themselves as the platonic form of humanity under whichever title they choose.
That, at least, would have been cheap.
Contrary to expectations, the statues look like male and female representations out of a vintage science textbook, though critics have noted their proportions skirt the edge of pornography. Their sexual details have largely been rounded out and rounded up, the man’s groin and the woman’s bust highly exaggerated but lacking the detail that might warrant legitimate public complaint.
Though people have complained.
When people complained that the statues were simplistic and, in their simplicity, were alienating, the city shrugged its shoulders and asked if the public could do a better job. When several members of the public demonstrated that they could, the city shrugged it shoulders and said there was no budget. When members of the public offered to do it pro-bono, the city pretended to not know what the word meant.
Further complaints took the form of vandalism.
‘The Statue of a Human Man’ and ‘The Statue of a Human Woman’ no longer look like anything humanity has produced through nature. They do not look human at all.
But the people are happy.’
-an excerpt, Autumn by the Wayside
