It just sort of appeared suddenly at the beginning of Fall term. We have all seen it sitting there in the Hopkins Center Darling courtyard on our way to lunch or the Hinman Boxes. Yes. That statue.
The one of the man who is contemplating his own crotch while squatting on or possibly into someone else's head.
Am I the only person who wondered where this thing came from and why we have to look at it?
Student reaction, for what it is worth, seems to be generally confused and skeptical. It seems like nearly every student I have talked to either made a lewd comment or laughed out loud the first time he or she saw it.
There seems to even be disagreement over what is going on in the sculpture. Some believe the man crouching on top is giving birth to the other figure, but an equal number seem to think he just ate that thing for last night's dinner and it's just come time to, shall we say, pass it on.
Personally, I side with the birth option, but, in all honesty, at first glance it does look like this is a sculpture of one guy with his head up another guy's butt, maybe looking for some misplaced car keys.
Will Lamson '00 does take a more mature and balanced view than some. While admitting the statue is "weird" and that he is not quite sure what it is about, he also thinks that "it's good that there's finally something like it at Dartmouth. The rest of the campus is so non-arresting and non-confrontational."
Fortunately there is actually someone on campus who really knows something about this work.
According to Hood Museum Director Timothy Rub, the piece is indeed about birth, not digestion.
Entitled "Bearing," the sculpture is the recent work of a prominent young British artist named Anthony Gormley who emerged during the 1980s. He mainly creates sculptures that are based on the human form and are meant for public display.
Rub does admit that the sculpture is quite ambiguous, acknowledging that "the work is about birth, yet the figure giving birth is a male."
But he also believes that, while some people may find the sculpture confusing, "to many its ambiguity is liberating because the viewer is not tied to one interpretation."
I can accept that. But when it comes to Gormley's own words about his work, I have a little trouble taking it all seriously. In a press release posted near the sculpture, Gormley states that he attempts to transform "what exists in the outer world by uniting it with the world of sensation, imagination and faith."
He also says that he turns to the body "in an attempt to find a language that will transcend the limitations of race, creed and language, but will still be about the rootedness of identity."
I have been exposed to quite a wide variety of art in museums and in class, and I feel that I can appreciate a deeper meaning in most of what I see, even contemporary art. But I am not so sure about this one.
There is a rumor circulating among the Hopkins Center staff that the sculpture was originallly supposed to be displayed in the Hood Museuem, but officials thought it would traumatize the little children who came on field trips. Rub denied the rumor.
Of course it is good for art to be thought-provoking, but let's be practical and put that aside for a moment. A good number of visitors traipse through the Hopkins Center each day. Why decide to put a sculpture which is so admittedly obscene at first glance in such a public place? I can only begin to guess what the mothers of most prospectives think when they see this thing on their admissions tour.
This brings us to one final question: how long will this thing be here, radiating an aura of anal splenditude every which way? Most of us will probably be happy to hear that the piece is on loan for just a year from Mr. and Mrs. John Rosekrans, Jr., a pair of art collectors from California.
California. Somehow that doesn't surprise me.
