I do, however, wonder whether the artist's research (if any) included discussions with veterans who actually attended nuclear tests. Tests which were so powerful that it was possible to see the outline of the bones in their hands, despite the fact that their palms would be pressed firmly into their eyeballs. Furthermore, the veteran would not be in an upright position, they would be squatting on the ground, trying to adopt the shape of a ball with their arms jammed between their knees with their back to the explosion. If they had been standing up, they would have been blown over and thrown a considerable distance by the blast of the nuclear device.
It could be suggested, I suppose, that the figure represents someone who is reacting to the after-effects of a bomb; and, in effect attempting to distance themselves from the device. Once again, however, this does not represent the experience of the average nuclear test veteran. Throughout the whole experience, from the beginning to the end, the ordinary squadie would be expected to remain in that sedentary position until some time after the explosion. Only then, could they stand up and look back at the fire-ball; and, even then, they could not leave until ordered to do so. Accordingly, whilst it is easy to admire the artistic element of the statue, from the point of view of a nuclear test veteran, it is difficult to understand exactly who is being represented by the figure.
Finally, as a nuclear test veteran (sorry to keep repeating myself), I would be interested to know how much (if any) of the association's finances were used to fund an exhibition which I have heard described as a vanity project. No need to send answers on a post card; just use the Comment facility provided by FB.