Not that anyone has suggested adding it to the list of statues that merit some consideration for pulling down. But, you never know what’s just around the pike.
Several reasons why the Statue of Liberty passes muster for keeping it around; although a couple of those reasons wouldn’t pass with certain U.S. political/cultural factions:
- It enshrines/honors a human value present in the founding document of this country. A value that is widely accepted in the U.S. and abroad. And while we may disagree about the meaning, “liberty” is one value, possibly the only one, that Americans can agree is good to have around.
- While the form/model of the statue is human and female, it’s not an historical figure and therefore, doesn’t venerate an individual or a god that people worship.
- It was originally “proposed by Édouard René de Laboulaye the president of the French Anti-Slavery Society and a prominent and important political thinker of his time.” In honor of the Union prevailing in the Civil War and abolishing slavery. Although that actual historical reference appears to have been lost on all but a few Americans.*
- It was a gift. From the people of France. (Not nice to reject gifts of noble intent.)
- It has artistic merit. Even if one doesn’t appreciate neoclassical style.
Irrelevant is that it’s huge, iconic for this nation, a tourist destination, and New Yorkers, even Trump, would lose their shit if there were an effort to pull down The Lady.
Looking over that list of reasons, the other statues, etc. that can easily pass are those depicting non-human animals. Some are sort of creepy but most are rather nice.
The Washington Monument comes pretty darn close to passing as well. (Construction began in 1848, completed 1884, and dedicated 1885, almost two years before The Statue of Liberty.) One reason it passes is that the building committee lacked the funds for statue of Washington in the design plan; so, they skipped it.
The statues, monuments, memorials that totally fail are those to honor Confederate leaders who initiated and waged war against this country for the sole purpose of maintaining the right to own other human beings and to expand that horrendous economic and moral plague into other territories. Legally, they were traitors and engaged in treason. That many were subsequently allowed to live out their natural lives in peace instead of being held to account for their crimes wasn’t meant to give them an honorable place in U.S. history. Those statues, etc. are an historical perversion. None should ever have come into being and it’s way past time for all of them to go, including my pet peeve, the Robert E. Lee Memorial
However, are there no other public statues, etc. that warrant reconsideration? Why are J. Edgar Hoover and John Foster Dulles honored with public structures in their names? Interesting to notice that not everybody is so complacent:
A wax-like, life-size figure of J. Edgar Hoover, which was recently installed among other memorabilia in the FBI’s New York Field Office, has been removed because of objections from bureau personnel.
The decision to oust Hoover, … , is something of a cultural moment for the bureau. Once revered among FBI agents, Hoover is no longer universally admired at the crime-fighting organization he built.
“There are no plans to display him again,” said Michael Kortan, assistant director of the FBI’s Office of Public Affairs.
This diary thread is now open for statues, etc. nominations “to stay” and “to go”. (Make a case for those selected to highlight in either category.
*How widely known was that when it was dedicated on October 28, 1886? Was it strictly coincidental — no relationship and not in any way an impetus — that Confederate statues, etc. began going up around the same time and and for many decades thereafter?
Benjamin Franklin – all statues, etc. His contributions to this country and people were significant. While he did once own two slaves, he later became president of an abolitionist movement.
That seemed to be the consensus a few weeks ago and I couldn’t make much of a counter-argument.
Breaking:
USS John S McCain collides with oil tanker – Ten US sailors missing
Too soon to tell how much damage the destroyer sustained. It was launched in 1992 and commissioned in 1994. The expected service life of ships in the US Naval fleet is 30-35 years. So, the USS John S McCain is getting up there in age. Might need to be retired sooner than expected.
Thank you for a succinct history of the Statue of Liberty and its place in American culture.
It’s interesting that legislation was passed in 1955 to ensure that Arlington House would become a permanent memorial to Robert E. Lee and would be furnished and interpreted to the period of Robert E. Lee. Prior to the 1955 legislation, the home did not contain any furnishings made after 1830. (Lee did not live at Arlington House until 1831. At that time, Lee’s in-laws owned the home and lived there.) Civil rights issues were heating up in 1955 and southern Democrats were powerful in Congress. Hmmm!
Nothing like enshrining historical revisionism in legislation. If they could have, they would have elevated Jefferson Davis to co-president 1861-65 in the national records.
After Brown v. Bd of Ed, those shameless racists rushed to preserve anything and everything they could. Giving into them is also part of the American DNA. As is subsequent whittling down of what they got. Export of slaves banned in 1794 and import banned in 1808. They should have banned the buying/selling of slaves because that good intentions of that second ban led to the worst period for those enslaved.
Mount Vernon shows some of this.
There is a plaque commentating the slaves who lived here. It was put there in 1989. Think about that for a second. I never went there before that – so I don’t know how much was said about Washington and slaves before ’89.
In 2016 there was a project in the African American Cemetery to study the remains of those buried there. There was NO MARKER before this that there was even an African American Cemetery there.
I don’t have a problem with celebrating Washington at all. We celebrate him despite the fact he owned slaves, not because of it. Jews certainly have every reason to celebrate him.
I don’t think the Jefferson Memorial should be either. I do think there should be some indication at that site that he owned slaves, and something about his own writings about that fact.
Also staying are the monuments in Arlington National Cemetery to the Civil War. Though the Lee mansion should be torn down.
Statues on battlefields should remain. Tearing down statues at Gettysburg would, I think, be absurd.
Beyond that every Confederate monument should come down.
So should the Lenin monument in Seattle FWIW – not sure what they hell they were thinking.
The Lenin statue in Seattle isn’t on public property and was purchased and is for sale like any other work of art. Thus, doesn’t belong in this thread.
Not much why or reasons given in your list. Why should Arlington House be razed? It was constructed to serve as a living memorial to George Washington. At the time it was built, Mt. Vernon had been passed down to Washington relatives and it was not expected to become a memorial.
Mt Vernon isn’t public property — owned and operated by a non-profit organization that receives no federal dollars. Same with Monticello and Montpelier. Therefore, also don’t belong in this thread.
The Jefferson Memorial does and it doesn’t satisfy my SoL criteria. A subject for discussion and not opinion IMHO. (Why no John Adams memorial in DC?)
IMO we have altogether too many statues, memorials, etc. in honor of wars. Perhaps fewer would make us less warlike. The only one that I could make a decent to keep is The Wall. (The creepiest may be the Korean War Memorial.)
Agree, the SoL should stay. A fine piece of art, and not made or erected by slave labor or inspired by a pro-slavery sentiment. Not the case for the Washington Monument, which honors a slave owner, and which likely involved slaves in the construction. Further, the WM builders failed to fully honor the ancient Egyptians, whose megalithic building style they borrowed, by using individual blocks instead of making it out of one giant piece of granite like the ancients. The public was thereby robbed of watching the probably humorous spectacle of builders trying to move a 400-500 ton block of stone into place.
As for the issue of removing Confederate monuments, I’m less enthusiastic, and prefer that separate explanatory monuments/plaques be installed next to the existing offending ones, making clear in plain English what these people were about, what they stood for. Generally I think it’s a bad thing to hide or erase our history, even as I understand and sympathize with the strong sentiments by many in removing and as I acknowledge far too many of these monuments still exist.
Other alternatives: remove many to a less prominent place in the community and add explanatory plaques. Or put them in a local museum.
There’s also the slippery slope problem, as I allude to in my opening paragraph. Already I’ve heard seemingly sane liberal voices in the media calling for a removal of monuments to some of our slave-owning founders, echoing Trump’s not-irrational remarks. Just saying this thing could get out of hand.
And already the polls show rather surprising nationwide lack of majority support for removal of the Confederate monuments. Even among blacks.
The Washington Monument honors the Colonies general in the American Revolution and first POTUS. No record that honoring slavery formed any part in the construction of this monument which only began forty-nine years after his death and forty-eight years after his slaves had been emancipated.
If we’re going to include faithfulness to original sources and designs and the use of slave labor in construction, half of DC would have to go. It’s also not on topic — the issue of the use public spaces and monies to honor the dishonorable.
There was a long time lag between the end of the Civil War and when these Confederate statues, monuments, etc. began to be erected and continued to be constructed over the subsequent decades. Was history erased before those statues, etc. were built? Of course not! They were constructed not for historical accuracy but for fake history. Private museums that don’t receive any public funds can take and display them.
Americans are complacent and always have a preference for not changing a damn thing. Of course the polling finds lack of support for removing these statues. Same was true for integrating the military, schools, and public employment. What was the support level for same sex marriage when the MA SC declared bans on it were unconstitutional? And in all those instances a whole lot of people fought back against the change.
I’m afraid you misread my remarks on the WM — which structure I noted touched on slavery in just two specific respects: as it honored a slave-owning founder and as it (likely but not definitively) involved slave labor in its construction. Nothing about being built to honor slavery as you suggest.
But the consideration of the WM for disapproval and removal is part of my slippery slope argument as I noted later. Certainly though not on the grounds of it not being fully faithful to the ancient Egyptian engineers — that was a tongue-in-cheek aside I was apparently unable to resist.
As for the Confederate monuments placement or adding explanatory plaques: it’s an opportunity to educate the public. That’s so regardless of when they were put up — opportunities to talk about Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and the southern resistance to the 60s CR movement. And — correct me if I’m wrong — last I checked this country is woefully undereducated certainly about the first two. How many monuments/plaques for Reconstruction leaders/heroes or those who fought Jim Crow laws or monuments for other than MLK for civil rights activities?
And where is the great national museum devoted primarily or exclusively to the history of slavery in this country?
Seems like our side might have benefitted more from a little more emphasis on putting up monuments to educate rather than simply tearing down to disapprove. Some notable exceptions: Gov Wilder of VA tried to build I believe a national museum on slavery some years ago, but fell well short of adequate funding and the effort was stopped.
As for the polling, I thought it worth noting (if it wasn’t noted here earlier), and found it surprisingly low for removal — and this isn’t the first time that Confed removal issues have been before the public, as the Confederate flag preceded the monuments by decades. And most surprising was the strikingly low numbers for removal in the black community. I should have thought that group among all others would have scored very high for removal and wouldn’t need more time to think about it.
The polls on removing Confederate statues shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. For the reasons I cited in my last comment. Plus, it has only recently impinged on the consciousness of those that never before gave it any thought before — the breakdown of the general public in this instance is approximately 1/3rd that have long thought they should go, 1/3rd that always support anything that supports racism, and 1/3rd not inclined to rock the boat unless absolutely necessary. It’s that last group that will move, generally much too slowly.
Care should be taken in offering any criteria to support or oppose any monument to make sure that it’s factually correct. In the case of the WM, not much construction was completed prior to the Civil War. So, slave labor is unlikely to have figured prominently in it.
Modern Egyptology begins with Bonaparte’s invasions of Egypt 1798-1829. The Rosetta Stone found in 1799 and it took until 1822 for a significant breakthrough in deciphering it. Artists are always ahead of the curve on incoming fashion; so, it the WM committee probably didn’t get or fully appreciate the Egyptian reference in the design. However, by the time the thing was dedicated, mad for Egypt was fully in vogue.
IMHO, the only fine war memorial work of art is The Wall. It pulls people in and evokes the intended heartfelt emotional response, even from people with no direct connection to that horrible war. Yet, it was highly controversial and denigrated when it first went up.
Wouldn’t taking down the monuments and leaving an educational plaque behind be better? “Here’s a big statue glorifying X with a subscript stating that over 600,000 people died in X’s efforts to maintain and expand slavery doesn’t cut it for me. If I were an AA it would be offensive and hurtful.
Backing off on Reconstruction to increase national harmony wasn’t without noble intent, but it hinged on a belief that slave states would adjust to the new law of the land after a generation. However, that was a flawed assumption wrt to losers and those willing to turn a blind eye to what followed weren’t exactly non-racists. Germany got it right after WWII — all the symbols of extreme inhumanity must be banned.
Why do we as a nation tolerate historical perversions and/or silence in the textbooks used for children in public schools? More of that “state’s rights” code that we tolerate to this very day. Not just racism but the gd churches preaching through science illiteracy.
I’m fairly hardheaded on this because I deeply resent the fact that my history classes were mostly about this or that war. Women and minorities were mostly erased. For the most part, I hated history lessons. Only later, because I’m a reader did I learn how much I like history and how fascinating real and wide-ranging history is. Non-readers are stuck for a lifetime with the boring crap presented to them in school as history. What a waste of education dollars.
An explanatory plaque, concise and pulling no punches, including the context of when and why the statue was erected, would tend imo to be better remembered by those coming upon the statue. People don’t expect much from plaques beyond boring facts and dates in support of the statued figure. Quickly forgotten. Not so the unexpected info in a counter-plaque explaining why the figure is a scoundrel/slavery proponent/traitor. Not sure why AAs, or you, would object to a small lesson in real history.
The presentation of our history for the schools isn’t just a pure process of getting the history right, but a highly political process, and the American Exceptionalists and flag-wavers have traditionally had the loudest voices, both at the local and national level. I think of the super-patriot types at the local level, and the white-washing script writers, including a number of establishment historians, who leave out the ugly or unflattering parts.
As for wars, there have been so many of them involving the US, so it’s easy to see our history as just one war after another. Especially lately. Not just war war war but How We Won the War (e.g., WWII — we won it, the Brits were brave, and Russia was also involved on our side) or It Was A Noble Effort Anyway (Korea, VN). Probably more white-washing to come from popular historian Ken “Bank of America” Burns on VN, at least judging by his comments promoting his doc which will likely influence how that war is framed and presented at the pre-college level.
Nope. The visual and not the text is what people remember most and statues connote honor. With the statue in place, few people would bother to read an attached plaque for other than the name of the person depicted and possibly the dates he lived. What I wouldn’t remove, at least for a couple of generations, is the pedestal. It would first provide a good place to attach the plaque to. More importantly, an empty pedestal would pique more curiosity and maximize the number of people that would read it.
So in addition to a counter-plaque, a counter-statue could also be erected to honor the abolitionist, anti-Jim Crow, pro-Reconstruction, pro-Civil Rights leaders and heroes. Very few of these monuments exist in the land (excluding for MLK), as your cited article at Counterpunch about NC suggests.
Yes, I’m a hard-headed free speech/counter-speech person, much preferring that to erasing/censoring/outlawing the darker aspects of our history.
Meanwhile I note that the Dem candidate for VA Gov (the name escapes me) has taken a bold position on Confed monument removal — let the local communities decide. What a courageous stand. I understand his GOP opponent, one Ed “Don’t Confuse Me With Dizzie” Gillespie, feels similarly, but being a Republican, it’s par for the course.
Remove the statue, add a plaque, and done. Your proposal requires money to build a “counter-statue” and more use of public space. And who chooses the counter-statue? If not controversial in the community erecting a “counter-statue,” it wouldn’t serve the intended purpose. If controversial, strife/divisions are increased. This is an instance where less would serve better than more. (Note: I’m not only speaking of statues but also the public squares, schools, and roads named for Confederate leaders.)
The worst effect of your proposal is that it adds more false equivalence. Bothsiderism bs that runs amok in this country. The fundies want “creationism” in public school science classes because to them evolution only tells one side. Yet, evolution is science and creationism is religion and therefore, doesn’t belong in a science class.
wrt “communities decide on whether a statue stays or goes,” isn’t that how we got into this mess? Referendums aren’t even a good means for “communities” to decide. Local VIPs know how to shape community opinions in accordance with their wishes in those instances when they can’t be the unilateral “deciders.” Plus as I stated earlier, local communities skew provincial and are more invested in what exists there than any national interest and higher principles. If it were up to local communities up through the state of those communities, Jim Crow would more overtly exist today, schools would legally remain segregated (they are still segregated because at the national level we’re too complacent and averse to going against what white people prefer), and marriage would still be restricted to one man and one woman (to cite just three examples of why local choice is a bad idea).
Too slapdash as it wasn’t only “noble intent” but developments in real time that could best be read as adjustments proceeding as expected: The Confederate General Who Was Erased
IOW – It is Confederate monuments that erased history.
Ken Burns is planning a new documentary on Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and the African-American migration from the South to the North. It should be completed by 2020. Hopefully this will reach a lot of people since Burns is a bit of a celebrity. I’m looking forward to Burns’ Viet Nam airing next month. It should be a blockbuster and very informative.
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/160598
I’ve commented on this elsewhere. Glancing at YT recently, I noted Burns has been out there on the speaking circuit for months promoting this 18.5 hour extravaganza. And some of his comments have me concerned this will be 18.5 hours of a form of both-siderist blame shifting, some important misreadings or non readings of documented history of that war that go against his frame, and plenty of personal soldier stories.
He claims not to have had an agenda prior to undertaking this doc study, but c’mon — he’s funded fully by Bank of America and it’s being shown on the controversy-averse PBS. Do you think he’s going to come down on the side of the scruffy, peacenik hippies?
And the two long interviews I saw on YT where he promotes his film occurred at the LBJ Library, where he spent more time praising LBJ for signing into law the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 and in bashing the “Camelot” backers for their supposed wishful attitudes about JFK and VN. Actually I don’t recall him making any comment about Johnson’s decision to cross the Rubicon in early ’65 with the massive escalation. I anticipate he will present the long version of “McNamara’s War”, with poor Lyndon being outnumbered and dragged along by all those hawkish Kennedy leftovers.
Of course I’ll watch, but wanted to put in my 2 cents before all the both-siderism and Nobody’s Right if Everybody’s Wrong begins.
A fear others have expressed.
B of A (back when it was still a SF/California bank) did all right for itself as the retail bank for those engaged in the war.
As the living memories of the Vietnam War are still prevalent today, this documentary will allow for an assessment of Burns’ work.
Thanks for your input. I protested that war in the Spring of 1970, so I will watch closely.
The Central Park Angel statue. (Generic enough without an specific religious reference)
h/t Mark from Queens at Caucus99Percent.
Not sure that was modesty on the part of Jefferson as it wasn’t likely that he’d be erased from the list of US Presidents. But his other two accomplishments would have been more subject being forgotten.
Mark also succinctly phrased the problem with Confederate statues:
The History We Leave Out of Our Public Spaces by Timothy B Tyson.
A primer on NC at the time of the Civil War — it wasn’t like what the subsequent Confederate propagandists have led generations to believe.
For those suggesting a museum of statues, here is an example of how it can be done.
Conception | Memento Park Budapest
There is a lot of things that Hungary has done wrong since the fall of the East Bloc, but this theme park isn’t one of them. The website could be better though.
Not a bad idea to stick all the statues of a time no longer revered in one place. However that period of time was decades in Hungary and the primary statues in the park were constructed during that time. It preserves what was real and lived through and good riddance.
The Confederate States of America only existed from 1861-65. Nothing was constructed by that government. The Virginia State Capitol was appropriated for use as the Confederate Capitol and it reverted back to Virginia at the end of the war. (US Federal buildings in the secessionist states were seized and used by the Confederacy.) The Confederate statues, memorials, etc. were created long after the Confederacy had ceased to exist. Created to falsify the history of its existence and wipe out the history over the next couple of decades.
When the people of the US southern states are able to say “good riddance” to the Confederacy and Jim Crow era (1880-today) and remove all the statues, memorials, (including all the public properties named for those leaders), I suppose a “memento park” to house some of that junk somewhere in the south would be acceptable. We’re a long way from that point in time.
The Guardian – New York mayor considers Christopher Columbus statue removal
Not sure why NYC Italian Americans have embraced CC (that national holiday in his name may have something to do with it) because it was the Crown of Castile that funded his explorations/invasions and he made no effort to sail to and land on what later became the continental U.S.
Until or unless “to stay” and “to go” statue arguments are made, I’m not going to think this one through on my own and therefore, am indifferent. However, CC Day only became a federal holiday in 1937 and I’m with those that have been pushing to rename it or junk it entirely.
I’ll add here as this thread is apparently dead that what I’d hoped for with this diary was that others would nominate and make a “to stay” or “to go” case for specific statues, monuments, etc. One such as the NYC CC statue that is unfamiliar to non-New Yorkers. And also recognize that the NYC CC statue isn’t the only one:
Columbus Circle, Washington DC. And there’s one in SF (Telegraph Hill) and one in San Jose that activists are calling for removal. Considering that CC enslaved western hemisphere natives and exported many back to Spain, these efforts share a common theme with those wrt Confederate statues.