Artspotting: Masterpiece or Movie Prop?

"It's not a work of art." That's what Moe Brooker said, a professor at Moore College of Art and Design and a member of Philadelphia's Art Commission. Moe was talking about the famous/infamous Rocky statue. It depicts Rocky Balboa, the boxer played by Sylvester Stallone in the role that made him a film icon. In a classic scene, Rocky runs up the steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art, followed by a few hundred local street urchins, raising his fists in triumph as the children chant his name. It is an undeniable movie moment.

The statue was sculpted by A. Thomas Schomberg for the filming of Rocky III in 1980. When the film was done, Stallone donated the statue to the city of Philadelphia. And that is when the debate began. Is this statue a work of art? Is it an object of kitsch? Is it an honor to the city? Is it an embarrassment to the city? What, by the way, is art anyway? E. Harris Baum, Philadelphia's Parks Commissioner, wondered, "If a film about Donald Duck in Philadelphia comes out, do we put a Donald Duck statue in our park system?" The statue was propped up and taken down more times than Rocky was in the boxing ring. It was stored in a warehouse for a few years. It was in front of the Spectrum sporting arena for a few years. Every time another big movie production (Mannequin, Philadelphia, Rocky V) wanted to film the statue on the steps of the museum it would go back there for the duration of the shooting.

In 2006, the statue was moved to what looks to be its permanent home: the bottom right of the steps leading to the Museum. City Commerce Director Stephanie Naidoff was pleased with the decision. She said, "What more wonderful a symbol of hard work and dedication is there than Rocky?" Millions agree. Every day, visitors to Philadelphia snap pictures of themselves doing the Rocky pose at the top of the steps, or standing next to the Rocky statue at the bottom. The statue, like the movie, is a hit.

But is it art? Truth be told, no one has a good answer to that question. Ernst Gombrich, the famous 20th century art historian, probably said it best: "There really is no such thing as Art. There are only artists." The true greatness of the Rocky statue is that it sits on the line between what we are comfortable calling art and what we are not. It is a statue of a fictional character from a popular movie. The statue wasn't even made to be in the original movie, but in the third sequel. But what is the difference between that and a work of fine art like Jean-Léon Gérôme's Pygmalion and Galatea, which is a painting of a statue as it is described in a story from Ovid's Metamorphoses? Gérôme's painting hangs happily at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Is Rocky, the sculpture, less-than-art because Rocky, the movie, was less-than-art? What, then, do we do with William Hogarth, whose paintings were directly inspired by the pulp fiction of 18th century England? Hard questions to answer. Rarely does a work come around like Rocky that is so perfectly placed both to delight and to vex us. You can go get your picture taken with Rocky at the bottom of the Museum steps any time day or night. Decide for yourself whether the statue is elevating your spirits or insulting your intelligence. Rocky, whatever your position on the matter, is here to stay.