Dead Prince Harry Sculpture to be Unveiled in London


A dead Prince Harry is featured in “a memorial honoring those willing but unable to serve in the Iraq conflict” by sculptor Daniel Edwards, scheduled to be unveiled at the Trafalgar Hotel on October 11.

“The Memorial features Prince Harry laid out before the Union Jack with pennies placed over his eyes and head rested on the Bible. The statue suggests the tragic outcome of a confrontation in Iraq’s Maysan Province with the Iranian weapons smugglers for whom Harry’s tank regiment was scheduled to patrol. Prone with his unfired gun still holstered, Prince Harry is represented clutching a bloodied flag of Wales, and holding to his heart a cameo locket of his late mother, Princess Diana, while a desert vulture perches on his boot. Harry’s head is earless, denoting the explicit threats against the Prince from militia leaders saying they planned to send him back to his grandmother ‘without his ears.'”

The clay mold pictured here still has the ears, but according to Radar Online they are to be removed…and sold on eBay.

And, pardon me for noticing, but it looks as if there is something going on in Prince Harry’s trousers (click on left shot, below).

Deadprinceharry2 Deadprinceharry3

You may remember Edwards for his oh-so-subtle takes on Britney Spears giving birth, a Paris Hilton autopsy, and Suri Cruise’s poop.


  1. peterparker says

    In Pere LaChaise cemetery in Paris there is a gravestone that is a life-size statue of the deceased, Victor Noir, an aristocrat killed by Napoleon. The gravestone is made of bronze, so the entire statue has a beautiful patina…everything, that is, except for the crotch, which has a rather prominent bulge. For decades that bulge has been rubbed for good luck, resulting in a lovely polished shine. I’d like to rub Harry’s crotch in exactly the same way…only I’d use my tongue.

  2. Scott says

    At least people are just being disgusting and not trying to comment on the statue’s artistic merit, since it has none.

  3. stolidog says

    I think it’s poetic, forceful and has JUST SO MUCH ARTISTIC MERIT i can’t control myself.

  4. Hephaestion says

    I think this is the stupidest idea for a statue I’ve ever heard of. Much better to have a LIVE statue of Prince Harry, shirtless, with a bulge, standing like an Adonis. Now THAT I would go to see.

  5. Ted B. (Charging Rhino) says

    How tacky…..

    The ultimate revenge would be for Prince Harry to buy the accursed-thing and stash it away unseen for when he might actually need it at Frogmore…hopefully in 60 or 70-years.

  6. Alain says

    What’s next ? GWB crying at night because of all those fallen soldiers ? Some athlete injecting him/herself with dope ?

  7. Joshua says

    Harry wanted to serve and still does. He was bitter that they held him back, but they convinced him it would result in a much higher death rate for the UK soldiers if he was there.

    And the sculpter has actually seen Harry up close, or at least his crotch… public at the club he has made many a jaw drop with that bulge of his…..big boy.

  8. Chaq says

    I’m with the general consensus that this is a piece of art that is in poor taste and inconsiderate to those who are close to Harry.
    Particularly ‘off’ is the fact that this portrays an alive person and brings into the piece a reference to what is a deeply personal grief between a young man and his dead parent.
    It just seems cruel, you know, and I don’t think the cruelty and severity of the war, and all its political factors, justifies the message the artist is tring to convey, and the method used.
    I know I’d be very upset if it was my *alive* brother, lover or other relative being sculpted as a dead person.

  9. nic says

    i hate to be schoolmarmish, but a consensus is by definition “general.” an oxymoron is where two terms which seem to negate each other actually function together e.g., bittersweet. “modern art” may be a contradiction in terms, but in BRETT’s usage of “oxymoron” one might think that he approves.

    anyhoo, i’m not much for gingers, but in harry’s case, yeah, i’d do him!

  10. says

    The original idea of it seemed interesting but it’s way overdone. The vulture, cameo, ears being removed, bloodied Wales flag? Christ, I’m surprised there wasn’t paperwork sticking out of his pocket with the DNA paternity results, as well as the queen’s tiara on his head.

    Why is he holding the flag of Wales anyway?

  11. tom says

    Seems morbid, but reminds me of the tradition for the French monarchs in the Renaissance…their tombs in St. Denis would have two sets of statues mounted over their tombs…on top, the king and queen would be kneeling, and dressed in royal finery, as if still alive and praying, and underneath, rather lifelike marble representations of their dead, naked corpses, with only a brief cover of “cloth” for modesty’s sake…apparently Catherine de Medici saw her own corpse’s marble likeness, as it was made the same time as her husband King Henri II who predeceased her…and she freaked out!
    I seriously doubt this representation of Harry will be in a royal sarcophagus anywhere in England.

  12. says

    Its art precisely because of the comments it invokes.

    Really? I’m not going to say it isn’t art, but just because something provokes comments doesn’t mean it’s art. 10 Commandment statue at a state supreme court, anyone? Britney Spears music? Ryan Phillipe acting? Skull with a gazillion diamonds? Lots of comments, little artistic merit.

  13. nic says

    well, here’s the schoolmarm again. art may “evoke” comments. an artist may “invoke” his muse for inspiration.

    what the fuck is going on with our educational system? oh, i rememember, bush is the education president. “chidren does learn….”

  14. Sean says

    Poor taste maybe, but it’s supposed to be a comment on the nature of patriotism and the irony of a member of the royal bloodline not defending his monarchic country. It’s not art because it evokes comment, it’s art because it’s created and presented as art.

    Duchamp’s urinal wasn’t art until it was put on display to be observed as an art piece.

    It’s intentionally controversial, just because it’s distasteful doesn’t mean it’s not art. The artists message was a political one, designed to create thought and discussion around the nature of patriotism and the artist’s perceived impotence and redundancy of the British royal family.

    But of course, the gays all end up talking about his big cock and how we want to fuck him. *sigh*

    Sean xx

  15. Rad says

    I am waiting for the bronze statue of Jenna and Barb in a jello-wrestling ring during Spring Break.

  16. Alexia says

    Patrick – He is holding the Welsh flag because he is the son of the Prince of Wales so he would have died at war as a ‘son of Wales’, which is a member country of the United Kingdom (aka Great Britain).

    In the immediate royal family, the family units are refered to by the region of their titles since they don’t have traditional surnames (although the entire royal family is collectively referred to as the Windsors). E.g. the Duke of Gloucester’s family are refered to as the Gloucester’s, the Duke of York (aka Prince Andrew) and his daughters are known as the Yorks, etc.

  17. dc-20008 says

    anyone have URLs of the pics of Harry with some wood? I recall there were some around at one point.

  18. says

    The bronze of Victor Noir is rubbed for fertility, when I was there the chin was shiny but the entire crotch was blinding! It had been rubbed “raw” if you will!
    I have photos of this bronze hanging in my house, its an interesting conversation piece.
    As far as Harry and his bulge I would guess he is sporting a nice endowment, perhaps the artist saw this.

  19. Matilda says

    Its actually a very good sculpture, its just a shame the artist had to go the “easy publicity” sophomoric route to get it noticed.

  20. MarcoPolo says

    This is a brilliant attack on celebrity-obsessed morons who value fame and money over life. If this sculpture shocks and disgusts you, how do you feel about the 75,000 civilians, including women and children, slaughtered in Iraq?

  21. Joshua says

    This piece isn’t anti-Harry. The artist admired the fact that the Prince wanted to be with his men, but was not allowed to go because of politics and the very real reason that he would draw the insurgents to attack even more than they already do in the hopes of scoring a big coup by killing or even better the capture of the Queens Grandson.
    It may be morbid, but it’s a great piece.

  22. daf says

    I find this extremely offensive. Not the sculpture, but that he’s holding a flag of Wales. He has nothing to do with Wales (like the rest of his family).

  23. Michael says

    It seems to me that the interest indeed lies in the ability of the work to provoke discussion. Formally, it isn’t that exciting (but there is a reason for that, see below). Conceptually, it brings to light the tension between a person willing and physically able to do something (here, serve in a war) and the specifics of his/her identity that becomes a barrier toward that goal. It nicely encapsulates the glorification of persona: In other words, our public vs. private “selves.” That the artist wanted this work to be symbolic of this tension is underscored by the rather traditional formal and iconographic modes of representation (from St. Denis (yes, but also the bronze tomb effigies at Canterbury more closely) to bronze sculptures of 20th century soldiers) and the more-or-less unspecified features of the young man represented. (Who would have known it was Harry unless we were told so? The only thing to indicate this is the small locket image of Diana, but I can’t see that in the pictures so I could not say if even that would be much of a clue.) Harry could be any person, save for “who he is” in the public sphere. What he wants as a private individual he is prevented from doing because of his public persona. But what is the line between the two?

    Now, why is he represented dead? Aside from being provocative, is there not an interesting parallel here between mother and son — indeed the very mother who is represented in this work as well? Did Diana (and others) not die, on a conceptual level, because of the tension between her public and private selves? Why would anyone be that anxious to get a picture of anyone else? The critical link, I believe, that this work raises is that between the myth of persona and the death of the person.

  24. says

    [url=]world of warcraft Powerleveling
    [/url]. is an Expert Online
    [url=]world of warcraft Power leveling[/url]
    [url=]wow Powerleveling
    [/url] Site, dedicated in providing customers with fun in the professional service of
    [url=]wow Power leveling
    [/url]. Excellent Service, Super wow power leveling.
    [url=]runescape gold[/url]
    [url=]rs gold[/url]
    [url=]rs2 gold[/url]
    [url=]runescape money[/url]

  25. says

    world of warcraft Powerleveling
    . is an Expert Online
    world of warcraft Power leveling
    wow Powerleveling
    .Site, dedicated in providing customers with fun in the professional service of
    wow Power leveling
    . Excellent Service, Super wow power leveling.
    runescape gold
    rs gold
    rs2 gold
    runescape money

  26. says

    it’s Art and it’s doing what is is designed to do … instil conversation and express anger . It’s NOT meant to be in “good taste”