Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If it ain't woke, don't affix it.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    If it ain't woke, don't affix it.

    Statue of Gandhi removed in Ghana.

    Critics argue that he shouldn't be honoured in Africa given anti-African comments made by Gandhi when he lived in South Africa, proponents argue that his positive message has universal application.

    I think I lean towards those wanting to get rid of it, even if Gandhi's views evolved later, but it does suggest the dilemmas involved in honouring any humans, given that basically everyone has done problematic things or has problematic views - and the more high profile a life they have had the higher likelihood of that.

    Plus of course Europe's cities are littered with statues of generals who are responsible for dreadful actions. Should they be removed? Or just have their plaque updated to more realistically describe their lives and actions?

    (this is a bit of a Diable Rouge opening post isn't it)

    #2
    He was basically a nationalist, there is always an 'other'.


    Some historians have critiqued his view on caste as well.

    http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/vie...3634-chapter-4

    My sub ran out when I finished with OU, but the link provides some tiny insight to the critique.

    As for your question, leave statues alone, because they identify with somebodies idea of history and, dare I say heritage, but challenge that at every opportunity by updating the plaques.

    Not that that helps...

    Comment


      #3
      There's a famous statue of Josephine (Napoleon's missus) on Martinique. The locals beheaded it (the statue) to commemorate the amniversary of when slavery was abolished and painted the neck red.
      Last edited by Rogin the Armchair fan; 20-12-2018, 13:20.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by NickSTFU View Post
        As for your question, leave statues alone, because they identify with somebodies idea of history and, dare I say heritage, but challenge that at every opportunity by updating the plaques.
        I tend to think they should be left up and context provided, lest the misdemeanours of the past be quietly forgotten. I can also see why people want to get rid of reminders of fear and suffering, particularly large scale pieces that dominate their surroundings. Where a fallen leader has encouraged a personality cult, the sheer quantity of images is likely to require a drastic cull but something should be left as an acknowledgement of history.

        Comment


          #5
          There'a a bust of Bomber Harris on the Strand that periodically gets daubed in red paint with comments like "war criminal" scrawled on it, presumably by high-spirited students from the nearby King's College or LSE. As that's an entirely valid assessment of him I'd say that serves just that kind of public service admirably.
          Last edited by Rogin the Armchair fan; 20-12-2018, 13:31.

          Comment


            #6
            Gandhi also refused permission for his first wife to take antibiotics because they were products of the West. She died as a result. Later when he had a very nasty infection, he took antibiotics.

            Now you could say he learned from his mistakes, which is admirable rather than raging hypocrisy. But making ideological points with someone else's life in the balance is scummy imo.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Benjm View Post
              I tend to think they should be left up and context provided, lest the misdemeanours of the past be quietly forgotten. I can also see why people want to get rid of reminders of fear and suffering, particularly large scale pieces that dominate their surroundings. Where a fallen leader has encouraged a personality cult, the sheer quantity of images is likely to require a drastic cull but something should be left as an acknowledgement of history.
              I don't think that's what happens, though.

              Instead, attempts to remove statues of e.g. Cecil Rhodes - who was regarded by many of his contemporaries as "Satan come again" during his lifetime - generates reams of copy about him being a "product of his time" and the British Empire as a fundamentally benign thing.

              Even though Rhodes appalling crimes are well documented, this apologia persists. The same is true of Columbus - and indeed indigenous Americans get to watch as America "celebrates" their own genocide every year.

              If we continue to display statues of these butchers, we continue to position them as the agents of world history - the story is of Columbus' "discovery" of the new world; Rhodes "civilising" of Africa; the Lost Cause etc. Providing context continues does little more than put an asterisk on those narratives, while still leaving them fundamentally in tact.

              A decolonial response would acknowledge a different history. Like, instead of Rhodes, we could have a statue of Dedan Kimathi, or George Washington Williams or Sequoyah.

              I wouldn't argue that any of these figures are unproblematic, but they present a view of history that presents a challenge to imperialist narratives.

              Comment


                #8
                I find public statues to be invasive, domineering and colonial whoever they're of to be honest. They're appropriation of space and the visual field around them. Look at Mount Rushmore, it's awful. Other monuments can be like that too. They knocked Gainsborough Studios down to build expensive flats, and I heard a guy talking on the radio in self-congratulatory tones about the references within the development that memorialised the thing they'd knocked down to make money. Territory-marking.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Bizarre Löw Triangle View Post
                  I don't think that's what happens, though.

                  Instead, attempts to remove statues of e.g. Cecil Rhodes - who was regarded by many of his contemporaries as "Satan come again" during his lifetime - generates reams of copy about him being a "product of his time" and the British Empire as a fundamentally benign thing.

                  Even though Rhodes appalling crimes are well documented, this apologia persists. The same is true of Columbus - and indeed indigenous Americans get to watch as America "celebrates" their own genocide every year.

                  If we continue to display statues of these butchers, we continue to position them as the agents of world history - the story is of Columbus' "discovery" of the new world; Rhodes "civilising" of Africa; the Lost Cause etc. Providing context continues does little more than put an asterisk on those narratives, while still leaving them fundamentally in tact.

                  A decolonial response would acknowledge a different history. Like, instead of Rhodes, we could have a statue of Dedan Kimathi, or George Washington Williams or Sequoyah.

                  I wouldn't argue that any of these figures are unproblematic, but they present a view of history that presents a challenge to imperialist narratives.
                  I recently visited the Mary Secole statue. While this statue is one in vast array of statues of white men, it indicates a different history and a change in how history is viewed. It may take a generation, but with a critical view of history being taught in schools (despite Government attempts otherwise), young people today are much more aware of 'hidden voices'.

                  Like these shown in the link for example.

                  https://londonist.com/2015/10/black-statues

                  The Death of Nelson relief is interesting as it depicts a black sailor and hints at the complexities of Empire. The date it was made is significant.

                  And while there is an argument to remove statues, my personal view is to leave them and use them as objects to critique.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Yank 'em down and smash 'em up.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Rogin the Armchair fan View Post
                      There'a a bust of Bomber Harris on the Strand that periodically gets daubed in red paint with comments like "war criminal" scrawled on it, presumably by high-spirited students from the nearby King's College or LSE. As that's an entirely valid assessment of him I'd say that serves just that kind of public service admirably.
                      I was wandering down the middle of the strand like a cow out for a stroll one day, and came upon this statue, and my involuntary reaction was to spit on it.

                      The Problem with an awful lot of statues is that the Downside is already far bigger and more obvious than the "upside" that got the statue put up in the first place. You don't have to look further than the background of all those interviews outside westminister. You can see that cromwell statue in quite a few of them.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Over here in Ireland we've never had a problem with getting rid of unpopular statues, King Billy, Queen Victoria and Nelson have all bitten the dust since independence, I'm sure some people would love to get rid of Wellington but it's too damn big.
                        Though vandalising statues tends to be a general problem, even someone as well regarded as Galway poet Padraic O Conaire had to be moved into the museum because he kept getting beheaded.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Is there a statute of limitations on this, as Trajan's Column is right in the firing line for starters.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Double post.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              well in fairness, Finishing the job on nelson's column did nearly as much damage as the original explosion.
                              Last edited by The Awesome Berbaslug!!!; 20-12-2018, 20:32.

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Originally posted by TonTon View Post
                                Yank 'em down and smash 'em up.
                                Keep 'em up and let the pigeons forever shit on their heads.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  I don't hold with that. That said the statue of cromwell in the garden of the house of commons does act like a huge warning light that the UK is a country with a fucking dangerously delusional attitude towards their own history, and that literally don't give two tiny shits about Ireland.

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    There's a statue in Cardiff of "John Batchelor - the Friend of Freedom". Had no idea who he was. Turns out he was about the only person who stood up to the Bute family who rules Cardiff with an iron fist while their serfs strip mined coal out of the valleys in conditions that would even horrify a Tory. The Butes hated Batchelor so much the newspapers they owned ran libellous stories about him every week. However he kept going as a right pain in their privileged asses. After he died, his friends (and many enemies/victims of the Butes) clubbed together to put up a statue.

                                    150 years later I'd be none the wiser but for that statue and me googling the geezer. Not all statues of old white men are commemorating terrible people.

                                    (If we did decide to remove all statues where would we stop? The Butes built Cardiff Castle and Castell Coch just outside Cardiff with their merciless capitalist hoard. Should we bulldoze them as well?)

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      I'd like the statues of old empire types to be left in place just so they can be afforded an appropriate level of respect:

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        “It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of 'em was one kinda sombitch or another.”

                                        Wise words to follow there.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X