People Are Saying That a Famous Statue, “The Thinker” Has Changed — What Do You Remember?
The claim is that a well-known statue by Auguste Rodin called “The Thinker” which shows a man in deep contemplation has come into question due to the Mandela Effect.
Many people say that the statue has changed from its original pose to a new pose never before seen. Some people even say that this is the third time it’s happened.
“What makes my Thinker think is that he thinks not only with his brain, with his knitted brow, his distended nostrils and compressed lips, but with every muscle of his arms, back, and legs, with his CLENCHED fist and gripping toes.” — Auguste Rodin
Here are the three possibilities that people claim they remember but which one do you think is the correct pose?
Maybe this will help: George Bernard Shaw used to model for Auguste Rodin and posed for this famous photo the night of the unveiling of The Thinker.
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW IN THE POSE OF “THE THINKER”
1906 Carbon print on platinotype
Where this gets strange: There are many books written that include descriptions of this famous statue but they no longer agree with each other. From our perspective, a plethora of books have been published with the wrong description of this statue and it went undetected until JAN 2019. It’s as though we all suddenly became aware of the mistakes at the same time but not for all the years those books were in circulation.
Poems have been written that reference this statue in a descriptive manner that no longer make any sense since the statue doesn’t fit the description.
The statue has been reproduced in movies but doesn’t match the statue currently on display in the museum. Like for example in the famous movie “Night At The Museum”.
Even stranger: People in photos imitating the statue don’t match the statue. It would seem they either can’t see the statue correctly or refuse to pose in the same manner.
Far stranger still: Products for sale online have descriptions that don’t match the statue being displayed in the sales window.
Product Description
The Thinker Sculpture by Auguste Rodin is one of the most famous pieces of art in the last two hundred years. It is easily Rodin’s most celebrated piece. This is a fine copy of the thinking man in his famed hunched pose with his fist on his forehead. Many wonder if he is contemplating or grieving. Regardless, you need this replica if you admire Rodin’s work.
Clearly, this goes beyond a memory issue.
Join the conversation! 36 Comments
Leave a Reply to rue202 Cancel reply
Interesting, I never knew that. My first inclination would be the numerous fakes out there. They might all be different.
I wonder if these people have a hard time imitating because they are lacking a stool.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Possibly but that still doesn’t explain the guy who posed for it the day it was released no longer matching
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very interesting, makes you wonder how this happens.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned its that there are no such thing as coincidences.
How many examples of the Mandela Effect need to arise for people to consider it a real possibility?
LikeLiked by 2 people
A few more will tip the scale, more and more people are becoming aware almost daily.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Interesting. I believe in synchronicities and nothing is a coincidence as far as I’m concerned. My question would be, what is the point to all of this?
Time travel to the past is possible but, it takes a HUGE amount of energy to do it. And, again…why?
LikeLiked by 3 people
You stated — “nothing is a coincidence as far as I’m concerned”
My response — Agreed!
You asked – “My question would be, what is the point to all of this?”
My response – Possible test to see how people react. Maybe a message but we don’t understand it. It may have always been like this, but we never had the technology to track it, so it could just be how nature works. Possible weapon in the future caused a distortion pattern.
Whatever it is, its powerful and unpredictable but so far harmless to the present. No purpose given, and no source identified. I would say they are simply trying to prove a point about what is either (A) possible or (B) what they are capable of. Just a thought
You stated — “Time travel to the past is possible”
My response — That may be true, but this isn’t time travel. If the object was changed back in time the memories would be in sync; given that there would never have been any other statue but the one presented at that time.
This is more like an edit to existing reality. Something has selected certain statues and changed them while leaving others untouched. It has altered certain people’s memories while ignoring others. It did the change on a certain date (around JAN 2019) and no one noticed a discrepancy until that time period.
Every “Mandela Effect” is like this. They start on a certain date (in groups).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well *scratching head* as I have remarked, before, I can’t make sense of it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There’s accidental time travel in the form of time slips.
LikeLike
You stated — “There’s accidental time travel in the form of time slips.”
My response — Are you saying that time travel (any form) explains the Mandela Effect?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have no idea.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That just seems to be the general idea – although I realised you don’t necessarily employ it.
LikeLike
What is a time slip?
LikeLiked by 1 person
When one accidentally travels through time through no intentional action of their own. I’ve experienced it twice. Here’s a website I found discussing many time slip incidents that people have submitted to the site owner:
https://timeslipaccounts.blogspot.com/
(The most recent article gives my own experiences.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here is a TV show that is based on “Time Sliping”
https://trakt.tv/shows/journeyman
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s also one of my fav shows.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Definitely sounds interesting!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I loved that show & was pissed when they pulled it. Ditto New Amsterdam & Moonlight…and The Dresden Files…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Those are great movies also!! I have never seen New Amsterdam.
LikeLike
I have shared this with my group for some feedback. Thanks.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Aren’t the statues with different poses just copies with slight alterations made? Weird about the site and interesting.
LikeLiked by 2 people
No, there is currently only on version of the statue. Those other two are drawings that no longer match the originals.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I have just nominated you for the “Mystery Blogger Award”. Here’s the link: https://rachealnovel.wordpress.com/2019/01/11/mystery-blogger-award/
LikeLike
Thanks!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re welcome! Will you participate?
LikeLike
https://realitydecoded.blog/2019/01/13/i-have-been-nominated-for-the-mystery-blogger-award/
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ve read it.
LikeLike
Very weiiiiiiird.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep!
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is a real Marmer sculpture from +/- 1880 which look like the thinker from Rodin. Height 47 CM. https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ata6esVwrzcZhIJuspUZYhrGJLYd3A
which is not singed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very interesting !!
LikeLike
Thank you. We are now searching in drawings/ sketches from Rodin and students from Rodin. Maybe the image is familiar to someone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am very interested in the Mandela effect in general. I am a little confused as you have shown the trailer for Night at the Musuem 2 where the Thinker clearly looks (to me at least) like the statues as they appear today. Did the Thinker have his fist on his forehead when you posted the clip? Maybe this is another example of the Mandela effect taking place once again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No, I was showing him as an example where his hand was under his chin. It’s one of the three remembered positions. It’s also the only position I’ve ever known personally, so for me the movie is accurate.
LikeLike
This might explain it
LikeLiked by 1 person
Possibly, but as he said in the video, every possible reality is happening at the same time… thus the explanation he gave is logically (via his perspective) directly opposed by an alternate explanation being given by him in another reality. Is this version of him wrong to us or one of the others?
His explanation may have the ability to cover all bases but it also excludes them.
In short he has an 8000 foot view but no direct cause and effect answer.
It could be stated this way:
He may say this:
The statue changes because reality changes in relation to conscious thought.
But we still don’t know this:
What was the catalyst for the statue change? How can we control the change at will?
How can we track when change occurs?
So, right or wrong, he lacks focused logistics of the process used for the changes.
LikeLike