Kate Moss Loves Her $2.7 Million Gold Statue

by Jared Paul Stern (RSS feed)
Oct 5th 2008 at 5:02PM

British artist Marc Quinn's $2.7 million life-size solid gold statue of Kate Moss, which we told you about last month, just went on display to the public, and Quinn says the supermodel's thrilled. Said to be the world's largest gold statue made since the days of Ancient Egypt, the piece was unveiled at the British Museum in London and has drawn large crowds.

"When I showed Kate the statue, she told me she loved it," Quinn says of the piece, entitled Siren. "She modeled for me for a day or so - but she didn't pose for me like that." Noting that Siren is about "trying to live up to impossible dreams or immortality," something Moss apparently contends with on a daily basis, he says, "For Kate, she thinks it lifts her into a mythic level. I think she very much loved it because she appreciates the difference between her image and herself."

Tags: British Museum, BritishMuseum, Kate Moss, KateMoss, London, Marc Quinn, MarcQuinn, Statue

Filed under: Art

Subscribe to these comments

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Ronia D'Arc Oct 6th 2008 8:25AM

If the statue weren't wearing a sports bra and a thong--if Mark Quinn/Kate Moss took the chance of showing ALL her anatomy--then I'd consider this artistic. But with the most "sensitive parts" clothed in modern-day attire I think it's a serious cop-out and not nearly as controversial or provocative as real art should be.
http://roniadarc.blogspot.com

inny Oct 6th 2008 8:05AM

What a slut. When was the last time she was straight?

just me Oct 6th 2008 12:26PM

There is no reason for the body to be nude, some of the most classical and moving sculpture is also draped or covered--think classical Greek carytids. I don't knock the artist for chosign to clothe the model and really, would you want to stand infront of 'all that' being so vigorously displayed---it would be pornographic in this day and age. Having not seen it in person, I cant' say for 100%, but I think I would still prefer it with the modern day attire--it's all very 'yoga' anyway, and most people wear clothes while doing yoga.

Ronia D'Arc Oct 10th 2008 8:15AM

You're right about art and clothing--of course, they don't cancel one another out by any means. But too often, I think, the subject is wearing clothes that are flat-out tacky, ugly, or dated, and that ruins the whole thing for me. If Kate's likeness were wearing a twining toga-like garment, that'd be one thing, but a sports bra? Please.
More important than the tackiness factor of the statue's attire is the cop-out factor--the fact that the sports bra and thong are there because showing ALL of her anatomy would be considered offensive or inappropriate. Personally, I think it would make the piece a lot more interesting, because you'd have the juxtaposition of Kate (beauty) and an asshole (ugly, disgusting). A golden statue of Kate Moss doesn't move me. Its tribute to her beauty doesn't say anything new. But if Mark Quinn had dared to show ALL of this human figure, we'd have been presented with the difficult-to-accept--but undeniable--idea that beauty and ugliness are relative, and most often they go hand-in-hand.

Bill Oct 6th 2008 1:35PM

*rolleyes*

Stylehunter Oct 6th 2008 3:26PM

Though the pose is highly inappropriate, the facial expression is magnificent. It reminds me of the young Kate Moss, as we saw her in the Calvin Klein ads. Despite what she thinks, the statue does represent the Kate Moss we know!

European Luxury Blog
because true style matters...
http://europeanluxuryblog.com