Physical Monuments Controversy

From Trajan’s Column, completed in 113 AD, to the statue of Christopher Columbus in Easton, Pennsylvania, monuments and memorials have been a significant element of celebration and honor throughout history (Source B). Though monuments are typically meant as a symbol of honor, recent controversy over statues dedicated to Confederate leaders and generals has sparked the debate over how to choose subjects to memorialize, and the actual development of these memorials. When considering what or who to honor, one must also consider the subjects impact on history, ensuring that it is positive. In creating memorials and monuments, groups and agencies should examine the historical significance of the events or persons they wish to memorialize, and the

A recent hot-button subject in the media has been what to do with Confederate monuments in the South. After the removal of a statue honoring Robert E. Lee, a general in the Confederate Army considered by many to be a hero for the part he played in the American Civil War, a clear divide has formed over whether it was the right thing to do. Some agree with this choice, calling the statues remnants from a time of racial oppression in the United States. Others are outraged, considering it desecration of their proud history. Still others don't understand either side of the issue, and see it as a pointless feud. It is imperative to understand that to many people, these are more than just statues. Whether their impression is positive or negative, this issue goes beyond physical monuments.

The Preservation of the Confederate Memory lives on through the Robert E. Lee memorial in Richmond. Many historians have written about the monument of Robert E. Lee and his importance to the preservation of Confederate Memory. But, recently a major debate surrounding the monument has spurred an argument between two groups. One group wants the monument to be removed or relocated from its original spot in Richmond V.A. This group believes that it is an offensive symbol in support of slavery. The other group fights to protect the monument and its location because of its importance to the southern heritage. However, trying to understand the significance of the monument requires one to look through the lenses of both groups.

Conflict of interest often appears with post-Civil Rights Movement monuments. Placing a Confederate statue near a Civil Rights Movement memorial could be seen as an attempt to strengthen white supremacy which is one of the fastest ways to aggravate the immediate audience which would result in the removal of the Confederate monument. The placement of a statue can lend it authority or the semblance of government support. Monuments can be placed near a government building or near government-backed memorials and this tactic is known as symbolic accretion (2, p.420).

The size of a monument or museum is important to think about because you must ensure that the person or event you are memorializing receives the recognition it deserves. After it was decided that there needs to be a Holocaust museum on the Washington Mall, protesters stated that the proposed design was too large (Source E). “The purpose of the museum was to remember the Holocaust, not overpower the mall or its visitors” (Source E). By downsizing the design plan, curators were able to create a place of regard without overpowering the other memorials and museums. The materials used to construct a monument also play a role in ensuring a person or event receive the respect they/ it deserves. When designing the Vietnam Veterans memorial in Washington, D.C, Maya Lin decided to use “Black granite in order to make the surface reflective and peaceful” (Source G). Lin’s choice of black granite helped to create a somber feeling while still showing respect and remembrance to those who fought in the war. The size and material of a monument can have a huge impact on those paying their respects to a person or event and the way they recieve its

After the dreadful, unfortunate events at Charlottesville, Virginia, the distinct ideologies over the removal of Confederate statues or monuments have incited a vast debate in the United States. As a result of the great argument, people have developed, expressed, published, and defended the different ideas in the media, events, and marches across the country. Therefore, it is necessary to understand both sides of the predicament before having a concrete opinion on the issue. On one hand, the modern philosopher of art Arthur C. Danto rightfully expresses, “We erect monuments so that we shall always remember, and build memorials so that we shall never forget,” meaning that they serve the purpose of presenting the history of a place. However, what happens if these monuments were raised in a manner that offends the population of a city? That is the most common concern that surges from this argumentation since many people are offended by the portrayal of these Southern generals and leaders of the Civil War. Although the Confederate monuments

Of all the things in this world for people to fiercely debate today, 100-year-old statues of dead generals have somehow made their way into public discourse. In America, we face an interesting issue that has been ignored for quite some time: what to do with our monuments to Confederate soldiers. There are many reasons why I chose this topic, partly because I am already somewhat knowledgeable on the issue, but I still have much to learn about this topic. Confederate monuments are an important debate being held in our country right now and I intend to help explain why that is and help people to form their own opinions based on strong arguments.

The purpose of this report is to inform Fenves that statues have deeper meaning and they are part of a history that defines our present. Changing and replacing monuments is disrespectful towards donors, Texans and soldiers who died in the war. Looking over these sentiments and issues, the Task Force came up with five options.

The writer develops an effective argument that examines the three key factors (location, size, and material) a group or agency should consider in memorializing an event or person and in creating a monument in order to “effectively pay homage to deep sacrifice or honor moments of great achievement.” The sources selected illustrate a critical understanding of each source’s position, allowing the student to convincingly engage the sources to facilitate the student’s own argument.For example, in the first body paragraph, the student argues that it was a good decision to place the statue of Christopher Columbus in a serene location in order to invite reflection on the “important role Christopher Columbus had in American history” rather than “behind

People are often memorialized for their deeds. These memorials can be settling a country to being remembered for a great sacrifice. When a monument is considered, size, location, and the material it’s made out of is very deeply thought about. Why place a monument to Kurt Cobain in Wyoming? It doesn’t make any sense. If you build something out of wood, it can be burned away or slowly fall apart over time. These three parameters being up the ideas of how to go about making the monument stand the test of time. Source C to discuss where a monument should be located, Source E to discuss size, and Source F to discuss what a monument should be made out of.

Although both articles were written on different subjects they both use the importance of location to help support the main point being put across in each piece of writing. Downes uses short sentences and paragraphs along with certain word choices to give off a tone of disapproval. This tone was rooted from the subject about Mount Rushmore and The Crazy Horse memorial. Each of these statues are widely know across the United States but not for the right reasons. Downes makes it seem as if the location of the memorial has a factor in why each are so universally known and talked about. The Crazy Horse memorial is placed in a prime location, right near indian land. Every Indian had a different opinion on whether this memorial was a good thing

One of the controversial aspects surrounding this monument is its purpose, who is represented. Although some voices of the political right defend that the purpose of this memorial was always to shelter all

Location; where the monument is plays a big role in how effective a monument is in memorializing or honoring a person or moment. For instance Mount Rushmore, to the untrained eye, is four important men of the past on the side of a mountain, but it is actually quite more. “I have to admit: Mount Rushmore bothers me. It was bad enough that white men drove the Sioux from the hills they still hold sacred; did they have to carve faces all over them too?”(Source C). Source C is saying that the location of Mount Rushmore is disrespectful to the Sioux because that mountain is sacred to them, and the people who drove the Native Americans off the land have their faces on that

The American Civil War was a clouded era where, by comparison to modern norms, judgement was ill evolved; during the American Civil War era, slavery was still acceptable in certain parts of the country. However, it was nevertheless a cultural turning point in the history of our nation. Our nation has not always been the cultural mixing pot it is now. To arrive to modernity, there are many factors that we ought to take into consideration so we can be knowledgeable about how we got to where we are today. In the past months, there have been events that have caused a big spark in the debate of Confederate monuments; such as the rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, where protesters and counter-protesters caused a riot, and a big part of their fight pertained to if specific Confederate monuments should be removed or be able to stay. Some argue that Confederate monuments should be removed due to the very apparent connections to slavery and racism and also that times are rapidly changing. However, I argue that Confederate monuments should be preserved, but the monuments should also be evolving with our ever-changing society, in order to be honest about our nation’s past even if those memorials are somber or difficult to talk about. If we were to keep Confederate monuments we should add placards where it talks about specific events that will help with maintaining the education and learning of the American Civil War.