Postwar Diplomacy

[JohnW in E.TN]

Confederate Group Offers Statue to Civil War Center

Tuesday, June 17, 2008



AP

June 17: This photo provided by the Sons of Confederate Veterans shows a statue of Jefferson Davis near completion in a studio in Lexington Va.

RICHMOND, Va. — A Southern heritage group that opposed a statue of President Abraham Lincoln at the American Civil War Center is offering to donate a $100,000 statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis for the same site.
Brag Bowling, a spokesman for the Virginia division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, said the gift is intended to celebrate Davis's birth 200 years ago this month in Kentucky.
It is not, he said, payback for the Lincoln statue unveiled in 2003.
"We're not offering the statue for controversy at all," Bowling said. "We've had enough of that with the other statue."
The offer has led to some delicate postwar diplomacy between the SCV and the Civil War Center, which strives to offer a neutral, historical perspective. Officials from each organization met Tuesday, but no immediate decision was expected.
The symbolism of statues is strong in a former capital of the Confederacy where monuments to Confederate heroes, including Davis, already line its most elegant boulevard.
Monument Avenue also includes memorials to Confederate generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, both depicted on horseback. The addition of a statue dedicated to tennis great Arthur Ashe, a Richmond native, was opposed by purists who argued the boulevard was intended to honor Civil War greats.

Davis is interred at Richmond's Hollywood Cemetery, where thousands of Confederate soldiers are buried in a rolling green expanse overlooking downtown and the James River.
The majority-black city of 200,000 has taken a more reflective approach to the Civil War in recent decades, recognizing that the symbols and personalities of the period can be offensive to those who associate them with slavery.
The executive director of the Virginia State Conference of the NAACP said Richmond does not need another monument to a Confederate figure.
"There's not a need for any more Confederate anything. We're maxed out," King Salim Khalfani said Tuesday. He called the Davis proposal "tit-for-tat" for the Lincoln monument.
"It's very offensive to me personally because if their cause was successful I would still be picking tobacco," he said.
Christy S. Coleman, president of the Civil War Center, said her organization is approaching the donation as it would any other gift: Officials will examine whether it fits with the center's collections strategy and consider its future upkeep, among other issues. The board of the nonprofit center will likely take up the matter in August.
"If someone offers us a sword, we may turn it down because we have too many swords," Coleman said. "Or we'll turn something down if it's not authentic, obviously."
Bowling described Tuesday's meeting as very cordial.
"I think they understand exactly what we want and why that is a very good place to have it," he said.
Bowling says the statue is right for Richmond historically and it's the most precise depiction of the angular statesman cast in stone or bronze.
Artist Gary Casteel also brought a little-known aspect of Davis's life to his work: Davis is depicted with his son, Joe, and a mixed-race child, Jim Limber, who was taken in by the Davis family.
"There are lots of places that this statue would be accepted in a second," Bowling said.





------------------------------------------------------

John W.

[larry_cockerham]

John, thanks very much for this post. I was a little surprised by comparing this sculpture to the statue of Davis at the park at his birthplace in Kentucky. The Kentucky version is from a much later point in his life and is a little smaller, apparently, than this one. This will be an interesting series of events to watch just to see how the politics fall out. Showing the human aspect of Davis is a clever move on someone's part. Yes, I agree, there are other towns and organizations in the south whose arms could be easily twisted to accept this piece.

[DHPatrick]

Originally Posted by JohnW in E.TN

Confederate Group Offers Statue to Civil War Center

Tuesday, June 17, 2008



AP

June 17: This photo provided by the Sons of Confederate Veterans shows a statue of Jefferson Davis near completion in a studio in Lexington Va.

John W.

John W.,

I'm surprised that Davis would be a candidate. ...given the state of views of some today.

I'm also surprised that Davis is depicted in uniform.

[Elennsar]

Appologies in advance to those offended.

Maybe we should set up a statue of Benedict Arnold next to those of Washington too.

Y'know, for the sake of fairness and even handed treatment. Don't want to imply that there was something wrong with ol' Benedict deciding that he would sell out the Revolution for 20,000 pounds and a comission in the British army.

Maybe have Judas next to Jesus on the cross. We have to be "balanced" in our portrayal of what happened to Him, after all. Judas needed the money! His children were starving. And besides, it really wasn't selling out, since the Romans already knew where Jesus was, so he didn't even do anything wrong.

Bet you don't learn that in Sunday School.

Yeah. There are two sides to every story, but assuming that both sides are equally accurate and equally worthy of respect...


Well, if you buy the story on Judas, I have a highway to sell you. Its the only way to get to the middle of nowhere when you're in a hurry.

[DHPatrick]

[quote=larry_cockerham;91069]This will be an interesting series of events to watch just to see how the politics fall out. quote]

Larry,

I have to agree.

[unionblue]

Originally Posted by JohnW in E.TN

Confederate Group Offers Statue to Civil War Center

Tuesday, June 17, 2008



AP

June 17: This photo provided by the Sons of Confederate Veterans shows a statue of Jefferson Davis near completion in a studio in Lexington Va.

RICHMOND, Va. — A Southern heritage group that opposed a statue of President Abraham Lincoln at the American Civil War Center is offering to donate a $100,000 statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis for the same site.
Brag Bowling, a spokesman for the Virginia division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, said the gift is intended to celebrate Davis's birth 200 years ago this month in Kentucky.
It is not, he said, payback for the Lincoln statue unveiled in 2003.
"We're not offering the statue for controversy at all," Bowling said. "We've had enough of that with the other statue."
The offer has led to some delicate postwar diplomacy between the SCV and the Civil War Center, which strives to offer a neutral, historical perspective. Officials from each organization met Tuesday, but no immediate decision was expected.
The symbolism of statues is strong in a former capital of the Confederacy where monuments to Confederate heroes, including Davis, already line its most elegant boulevard.
Monument Avenue also includes memorials to Confederate generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, both depicted on horseback. The addition of a statue dedicated to tennis great Arthur Ashe, a Richmond native, was opposed by purists who argued the boulevard was intended to honor Civil War greats.

Davis is interred at Richmond's Hollywood Cemetery, where thousands of Confederate soldiers are buried in a rolling green expanse overlooking downtown and the James River.
The majority-black city of 200,000 has taken a more reflective approach to the Civil War in recent decades, recognizing that the symbols and personalities of the period can be offensive to those who associate them with slavery.
The executive director of the Virginia State Conference of the NAACP said Richmond does not need another monument to a Confederate figure.
"There's not a need for any more Confederate anything. We're maxed out," King Salim Khalfani said Tuesday. He called the Davis proposal "tit-for-tat" for the Lincoln monument.
"It's very offensive to me personally because if their cause was successful I would still be picking tobacco," he said.
Christy S. Coleman, president of the Civil War Center, said her organization is approaching the donation as it would any other gift: Officials will examine whether it fits with the center's collections strategy and consider its future upkeep, among other issues. The board of the nonprofit center will likely take up the matter in August.
"If someone offers us a sword, we may turn it down because we have too many swords," Coleman said. "Or we'll turn something down if it's not authentic, obviously."
Bowling described Tuesday's meeting as very cordial.
"I think they understand exactly what we want and why that is a very good place to have it," he said.
Bowling says the statue is right for Richmond historically and it's the most precise depiction of the angular statesman cast in stone or bronze.
Artist Gary Casteel also brought a little-known aspect of Davis's life to his work: Davis is depicted with his son, Joe, and a mixed-race child, Jim Limber, who was taken in by the Davis family.
"There are lots of places that this statue would be accepted in a second," Bowling said.





------------------------------------------------------

John W.

John,

I've been following this bit of news for quite a while.

WHY does the SCV want to "donate" this work to the museum in question?

My own view is, they're STILL ticked off at the Lincoln and Tad statue there and want to play "gotcha last" instead of "balance history."

Why not place the statue instead at the Confederate White House? Would it not be better suited there? Make more sense in teaching the hsitory of Jeff Davis and such?

Sorry, in my view, this is not a serious attempt to teach history, but part of a political campaign to top 'yankee' history.

The money for the statue would have been better spent on teaching history than trying to make a political statement.

IMO.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

[Elennsar]

Unionblue: A wonderful idea. After all, that's where a statue of him would best fit just as a matter of "where should one have a statue of Davis".

I deeply believe Davis was mistaken and morally wrong on the issue of slavery and secession. But he deserves to be presented fairly however ****ing some aspects of his life may be.

Fairly, however, does not mean positively or even "neither positively or negatively". If (and this isn't the case) Jefferson Davis was Judas reborn, after all the facts are weighed, then present him as such. If (as I suspect personally) he was a man with a bit more than his fair share of flaws but no actual malevolent intentions, then present him as such. The truth may be kind or cruel, but we need it shown, not what an artifical attempt to make it seem like the two men were merely on opposite sides of a question with no right or wrong answer.