As is probably pretty obvious I am greatly interested in
monuments. So it pains me to see what is
happening around the country with flashpoints in recent days in New Orleans and
Charlottesville, Virginia.
On one hand I understand that a certain population has to
see monuments to Confederates as a great big middle finger. That their ancestors were oppressed by the
Confederates, a war was fought over that and the Confederates lost yet the
monuments glorify that lost cause.
Although the Confederacy lost they have more monuments in
their cities than the average northern city does to its cause. It would be easier if the monuments had
always been to the fallen soldiers, placed in cemeteries or court house squares. But we have monuments to the leaders of that
fight.
But history is often not easy to deal with. It can be ugly and unpleasant to deal with, even
with 150 plus years of hindsight. I
doubt many descendants of Confederates would say they are proud that their
ancestor fought to maintain slavery.
They would be proud that they defended their home, country, state. That they fought well on the
battlefield. Was the cause the
Confederates fought for so ghastly that we need to clean it from our memory? Certainly not. But neither do we need to celebrate it. We cannot ignore it so we should strive to
understand it better.
So where is that fine line between commemorating and
celebrating? How do we better understand
the Civil War? Do we leave the monuments
in their places? Add nearby signage
explaining more of the story? Move the monuments
to an interpretive park? Does every city
have the space to create an interpretive park?
Probably not. When a monument is
not easily accessible by foot would signage really matter as few would see
it? If most “visitors” are driving by it
then any signage won’t be seen.
It should be clear that the answer is not taking down the
monument and hiding it. It appears that
this is what New Orleans is doing.
They’ve removed two of a planned four monuments. But the city has tons of other small
monuments scattered around. What is the
future for those monuments? There are
some too that advocate destroying the monuments once removed.
In Charlottesville the plan is to sell the Robert E Lee
monument. I’m not sure who is buying it
but because I haven’t heard anyone announce that Lee will be moved to an
interpretive park my guess is the buyer will hide or destroy the monument.
Ultimately trying to hide our history is what disturbs me
the most. We need to find ways to
explain it, show the multifaceted sides of the issue. None of this is easy. I wish I could offer up easy solutions to the
cities struggling with this. I
understand that cities would rather remove the offending monument than deal
with the harder discussion. But they
also should be aware that removing the monument is likely to do little to
improve the day to day lives of its people.
Sure there will not be the visual reminder but the scars of our history
are not so easily forgotten.
And the cities should be aware that it gives Civil War
tourists one less reason to visit. If I
was going to New Orleans six months ago those four monuments, along with the
other smaller ones, would have been on my itinerary. Plus the museums, cemeteries and other sites
around town. Maybe it would have been
lunch time while I was near some monuments and I would have eaten locally. Now the list has grown smaller. Six months from now how much will remain to
see? Will the concerted effort of the
city to erase its past instead of learning from it have soured me on making a
visit at all?
No comments:
Post a Comment