Personally, the statute isn’t a problem for me. One of the things that art pieces are supposed to do is create a reaction. In this case, that has definitely happened; positively and negatively.
Anyway, to me there are some flaws regarding the protesters:
- If folks are having a reaction to the statue now, why didn’t they voice their opinion from 2012 to 2014 when it was here before? If they say that they didn’t think it was coming back, then they weren’t paying attention as there was considerable positive sentiment then. I have asked people who were living here when the statue was on loan if was a protest then. Everyone I asked said no.
- Someone who responded to my comment on a Facebook page about the protest said that it blocks the view of the Art Museum. That is not true as the street where Forever Marilyn is placed is lined on both sides with Palm Trees. All you can really see are the steps to the entrance. I took the photo of the installation and that is what you see in the distance. You really can’t see anything to the left or right.
- On another Facebook page I suggested that going after the statue as a protest against objectification is like trying to heal a sick tree by cutting a branch off. It would make more sense to protest the original movie. I was told that you can see her underwear with the statue, but you can’t in the movie. It doesn’t seem to me that there is a connection between objectification and panties.
Anyway, there is a law suit pending regarding procedural issues by the Palm Springs City Council. We’ll see…