Princess Diana’s new memorial statue was unveiled yesterday at Kensington Palace in a ceremony.
While there were a few favorable responses to the statue, the final unveiling disappointed the majority of royal fans.
Diana’s brother posted two pictures after the ceremony in the Sunken Garden on July 1, the royal’s 60th birthday.
The monument was created by sculptor Ian Rank-Broadley, and Prince Harry and William apparently collaborated on its design.
Ian Rank-Broadley created the bronze statue, which depicts Diana with her arms around two infants. The monument towered above Princes William and Harry, who put aside their differences to attend the somber ceremony honoring their late mother. The princes “wanted the statue to recognize her positive impact in the UK and around the world, and help future generations understand the significance of her place in history,” according to Kensington Palace. “The statue aims to reflect the warmth, elegance, and energy of Diana, Princess of Wales, in addition to her work and the impact she had on so many people.”
Here is some of the recent comments about the monument.
“Not too impressed by statue gotta be said. Doesn’t look like her very much,” one person commented.
“It’s horrible. Not even Rank-Broadley’s best. And, tbf, he’s done some good works. #DianaStatue” one of them said, while another noted, “Just Dreadful. The Statue doesn’t capture her essence, she looks frumpy (which she never did) and if you’re going to put two children with her – how about HER CHILDREN!” A third commented, “Not a fan. It doesn’t look like her and while I get they wanted to depict her humanitarian work, it doesn’t translate well with those children. At least the Diana statue is not seated on a bench.”
The Diana statue was described as “Kitsch and archaic” by The Telegraph UK’s top art critic Alastair Sooke.
Diana was portrayed as “combative and confrontational, not maternal,” he added.
Another agreed, saying: “Not a fan. It doesn’t look like her and while I get they wanted to depict her humanitarian work, it doesn’t translate well with those
children.”
The next remarked, “Not too impressed by statue gotta be said. Doesn’t look like her very much. #DianaStatue.”
One more quipped, “#DianaStatue Sorry, I don’t like it and I’m pretty sure she would have not chosen that outfit, which will date this effigy so much.”
Another said, “As long as Diana’s sons are happy, that is all that matters but I am disappointed in the statue.”
A commenter tweeted, “The statue doesn’t look like her and the statement is cold and distant. Seriously. This is honouring her? Wow. Strangers honour her more. Poor Diana.” A person reacted with, “Not a fan either, now M can use it as ‘it’s a statue of grandma Diana with Archie and Lili’…”
Ruth Millington, an art historian who also works at Sotheby’s, said she “loves” the sculpture but acknowledges it has “nothing overly sentimental”
“Rank-Broadley was given a very difficult task,” Millington said, adding that the artist “has broken the mould of royal monuments”
“He has focused on rendering the folds of fabric to indicate movement: Diana looks like she might step down from the plinth and keep walking. It’s a monument which invites engagement and embodies her openness.”
“Am I the only one who thinks Princess Diana’s statue doesn’t really look like her? Where’s her warm smile?” asked another follower.
However, other people felt the monument reflected Princess Diana’s personality. “So that’s that with the unveiling; – A gorgeous statue summing up how the world perceives her and her charitable work – A fitting joint statement from both her sons I’m so glad Diana has a statue now and one which looks almost like her! Happy 60th in heaven Diana!” one of them said.
Another wrote, “The Statue totally encompasses Princess Diana; it’s beautiful.”
One more noted, “So I think the statue is a good likeness, what does anyone else think #DianaStatue.”
One more quipped, “Awww, the #DianaStatue is actually really nice. Lovely way for Prince Harry and Prince William to mark #Diana60”
Rachel Campbell-Johnston, the Times’ senior art critic, commended the monument for portraying a “casual Diana” free of the “usual conventions of royal statuary”
Campbell-Johnston says, “Instead of lofty hauteur he has conjured simple warmth,”
“Instead of a self-conscious pose, [Rank-Broadley] presents what feels more like a private moment.”
Jude Thomas
July 2, 2021 at 11:00 pm
Very disappointing, people would surely have preferred to remember Diana as she was, not how someone imagines how she would have looked. She was beautiful , young and caring but the statue makes her look like an old lady.
Simon Marcus
July 26, 2021 at 6:04 am
Art historian Ruth Millington “loves” the statue? And the Times’s art critic Rachel Campbell-Johnston says, “Instead of lofty hauteur he has conjured simple warmth,” and “Instead of a self-conscious pose, [the sculptor] presents what feels more like a private moment”? One can only despair of the professions that are supposed to uphold the finest standards in art.
The statue is a travesty, whether in terms of Diana’s actual features or with respect to her unique energy and aura. Who can contemplate this work and recapture the feelings they had on seeing the living person? That masculine jaw! Those balloons upfront!
l have to ask myself how it happens that projects of this importance and cost — the Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial in Washington, DC is another depressing example — fail to achieve the accuracy even of Madame Tussauds.
The failure to render a revered person as they were actually experienced in the flesh is tragic. We have an emotional need for such monuments, yet again and again the “artists” deliver an embarrassment. Fortunately, there are more reliable media. In film, video, and photographs, Diana may be found in her fullness.