| Tschabalala Self, Lady in Blue, Trafalgar Square, London |
Trafalgar Square's Fourth Plinth sculptures are supposed to excite comment. There is no point going to the trouble and expense of competition and rotation if they are put up and then ignored. Tschabalala Self's recently installed Lady in Blue has attracted a range of reviews - two stars from the Telegraph, four from the Times - but also a particular and insidious brand of criticism. Opposition to a global majority Everywoman was perhaps sadly only to be expected. Self had previously seen her work Seated daubed in white paint after it was unveiled at Bexhill on Sea in 2023, although the subsequent wave of volunteers who came forward to clean it suggests there was at least as much positivity.
Self's Trafalgar figure is a similarly oversized bronze, strikingly polychromatic, curvaceously cuddly, with a determination to be seen and heard. Much of the - largely male - criticism has indeed centred on her physique, ranging from Waldemar Januszczak's scathing and overtly provocative 'Mammy Two Shoes' (Tom and Jerry) comparison, to Jonathan Jones' four star salivation over 'the lady's generous proportions...fetishistic power...and commanding girth.' In a world which has largely got beyond body shaming, it is beyond tiresome that size, particularly of breasts and buttocks, particularly of a Black woman, seems so obsessed over. There are disturbing echoes of Hottentot Venus sexualised caricatures.
The second bone of contention is her dynamic 'striding' posture, arms swinging, away from the National Gallery and across the square to the city beyond. Perhaps she is literally leaving the gallery, bringing its art into the world and up to date. Her propulsive pose is not what one might describe as conventionally feminine - the pace is too long, the movement too decisive -yet echoed references to art of the past abound. Umberto Boccioni's 1913 Unique Forms of Continuity in Space, an attempt to convey Futurist dynamism in three dimensions, is assumed male but in reality androgynous. It is at least partly inspired by the female Winged Victory of Samothrace, well over two thousand years old. And what of Vera Mukhina's Soviet workers? Self's smartly dressed city-goer might be read as a playful, plasticky capitalist response, undermining earnestly heroic civic sculpture of a communist bent along with its riposte to the static, plain and dead male dignitaries who surround it in Trafalgar Square.
Patrick West bemusedly complains in the Spectator that Lady in Blue 'inanely celebrates merely being black and being a woman' as if this is a completely incomprehensible idea. Yet, Self is simply reviewing a long cultural legacy through the lens of her own lived experience. As a figurative version of one of Claes Oldenburg's oversized ice-cream cones or a sculptural reinterpretation of a Warhol, her sculpture might be seen as little more than Pop revisited. You might argue it is simplistic, but it is hardly controversial.
The many platitudinous pronouncements about 'our shared present' and 'collective future' are also missing the point. Ironically, Self's work was unveiled on Beryl Cook's one hundredth birthday and this summer's critically acclaimed centenary show in Plymouth saw that artist finally recognised as more than just a folksy riff on Carry-On nostalgia. Stylistically, Lady in Blue is the successor to Cook's subversive exuberance, proof that caricature can be affectionate as well as cruel and that serious commentary on class, gender and society can be made with smile. Is it the scale of the sculpture which has tipped critics over the edge, or is it the very beautifully patinated skin colour? Self's work might not be to everyone's taste, but its strident, striding, don't-give-a-shit joyfulness is undeniable. Female bodies do not have to be sexualised. Women are allowed to take up space. And art does not have to be serious.






.jpg)



.jpg)


