‘An awkward, lifeless shrine’:

Image: Dominic Lipinski – WPA Pool/Getty Images

‘An awkward, lifeless shrine’: Mixed reactions to Princess Diana statue

A journalist questioned the ‘awkward, lifeless shrine’ that is Princess Diana’s statue, and said that at least ‘the flower beds are nice’.

‘An awkward, lifeless shrine’:

Image: Dominic Lipinski – WPA Pool/Getty Images

The unveiling of Princess Diana’s statue at Kensington Palace saw Prince William and Prince Harry reunite for the first time in months to pay tribute to their late mother. But, it seems that the internet is not convinced.

Random children and Princess Diana

Form weighing in on the brother’s strained relationship, to the actual statue that is surrounded by three bronze children, it seems people have mixed emotions.

“I was a little saddened to see the kids statue were not Will and Harry,” wrote one person on Twitter. “But then it would be a little weird if they were really their mini statues but it’s weirder that their mum’s statue is accompanied by random children.”

“How very 2021 that Wills has transitioned into a BAME boy & Harry has chosen to identify as a young girl in the #DianaStatue,” said another.

The clothing

According to The Independent, the statue shows her dressed in a classic look, comprising a high-waisted pencil skirt and an open-collared pleated shirt that is said to have been based on a 1993 Christmas card. “Sorry but the Diana statue should be wearing the revenge dress,” tweeted one person in reference to the famous velvet gown she wore the night Prince Charles reportedly confessed to having an affair with Camilla Parker-Bowles.

“I have several critiques of the Princess Diana statue but the main one is that the outfit they put her in sucks,” wrote one person. “Should have been the bike shorts and Harvard sweatshirt.”

Others were simply disappointed that Harry and William did not get into a fist fight:

A harsh critic

2OceansVibe pointed out one of the harshest critics which must have been Jonathan Jones who wrote in an article for The Guardian that the statue is “a spiritless hunk of nonsense”.

“A larger than life Diana, who stands in an awkward, stiff, lifeless pose and has a face that’s more manly than I remember, modelled apparently with thickly gloved hands and no photo to consult, protects two children in her arms while a third lurks behind her.

“It is a religious image that shamelessly plays up to the most mawkish aspects of Diana worship. She deserves to be remembered. But does she need to be turned into a colossal divine protectress of all children?

“…this somehow nauseating statue will stand with all the bronze footballers as baffling evidence to future generations that in the early 21st century, people wasted their money, effort and debates on silly, sterile, insignificant works of art. The flower beds are nice though.