Artist defends controversial ‘bound woman’ sculpture at Cambridge station

The artist who made a controversial public sculpture described by a Cambridge city councillor as “a bound woman” has explained this interpretation was never his intention.

Gavin Turk, whose work Ariadne (Wrapped) stands in the CB1 plaza outside Cambridge train station, has responded to the criticism made by Green councillors this week that the work shows “just another way that violence against women is being mainstreamed”.

The sculpture depicts Greek goddess Ariadne covered in a dust sheet and tied up in ropes.

In a question tabled at a meeting of Cambridge City Council on 10 October, Cllr Naomi Bennett (Green, Abbey) asked whether in the light of the controversial Cambridge Don statue being taken down, the authority could “take steps to improve our cityscape” by inviting Brookgate, the CB1 area developer, to “remove the statue?”

Fellow Green councillor Jean Glasberg (Newnham) has echoed her sentiments, saying the statue “is giving a misogynistic message to visitors and Cambridge residents”.

Since then a debate has raged about the meaning of the sculpture.

Mr Turk is known for his painted bronzes, waxworks and the use of rubbish in art, and has even sold cans of his own urine for £500 each.

Speaking to the Cambridge Independent, he defended his work.

He said: “I have come to see that people can read the sculpture in the way that it’s being read. But, for me, it’s a sculpture that’s been wrapped. It’s not a woman that’s been wrapped. So I’m in a different place, but I do find it unsettling that people are getting unsettled. It was never my intention to upset people.

“Someone did come to me and they said, ‘I know that underneath it is a horse’. And someone else came up to me and said, ‘When’s it going to be unveiled?’. I was quite excited by that as a response to it, because it is sort of about anticipation. And it’s about the idea of how we see and what we want to see, and how we unpack things when we look at things.”

He explained that his inspiration for the work was a famous painting by Giorgio de Chirico which shows a piazza with a reclining classical sculpture of Ariadne and in the background there is a train going past.

“My intention was to look at the idea of a public sculpture, really,” he says. “I was also thinking about the artists Christo and Jean Claude, when they wrap public buildings, or wrap up architecture, and in some way offer this moment of transience, this moment of something transforming into something else.”

But now the artist fears his sculpture will be seen as “misogynistic”.

He says: “I think it’s kind of associated with that now, just because it’s been brought up and that picture of it has been presented. It might be a way that people see it. That perception picks up traction, and it sort of snowballs and then it then stands for that thing, even though it never was the intention for it to do so.”

He is now updating a QR code on the statue which will lead to a website explaining the meaning of the work.

However, more commentators have since pointed out that they see the sculpture as depicting a “victim” and have called it “degrading”.

Cllr Glasberg said: “I agree that the statue supposedly of Ariadne is giving a misogynistic message to visitors and Cambridge residents. The references to surrealist works of art and wrapping as a symbol of history and transportation through time are not likely to be apparent to most people, and indeed present Ariadne as a trapped and passive victim. In the version of the myth agreed by most sources, Ariadne was a clever, brave and resourceful woman who risked her life to help Theseus and his companions escape the labyrinth.”

Chesterton resident Jo Lucas said; “My view is that it is immensely degrading to women, showing as it does a woman bound and covered up. I am shocked that this is what people coming to Cambridge are greeted by.”

And Cambridge resident Julie Kavanagh backed the call to remove it, explaining: “I really support this proposal, partly because it is crude and ugly but mostly because if you look closely (and I know from observation no-one does!) you will see a woman bound, gagged, trussed up in sack cloth and dumped outside a railway station.”

Mr Turk’s wife wrote to the Cambridge Independent to explain that she sympathised with the commentators but that the work was not meant to be misogynistic.

“I can see that the sculpture is emotionally triggering to some of the residents and visitors to Cambridge, as indeed it is to me – when I see it through their eyes,” she said. “However, having known the artist and his work for over 30 years I also know this was not the intention of the work.”

She added: “This artwork can be read and responded to in many ways of course and all of them are as valid as the artist’s original intention. In my opinion that is what good public sculpture is for: to be a focus for public debate and philosophical discussion. In this time of increasing polarisation of views and perspectives it is important for artworks to be able to hold this discourse. Otherwise, if we remove anything that might hold painful or difficult associations or conversations, we are removing our opportunity to process our current human predicaments. Humanity is in deep trouble.”