Pastors Propose Historic Markers Detailing Slave Auctions and Keeping Confederate Statue Too

Joined
Oct 25, 2017
Messages
1,371
Location
44022
#1
Here's a solution to the Confederate monuments that MAY work!!!:

"Now, Riggs has come to a different solution. “Instead of being divisive and trying to take things down, why can’t we put some things up to tell a side of the story that hasn’t been told before?” he asked.


-During a packed work session at City Hall on Tuesday night, a group of local pastors laid out their plans to construct historical markers to the lesser told side of the Civil War in Franklin.

Pastor Kevin Riggs of Franklin Community Church noted the recent one-year anniversary of the Unite the Right rally and deaths in Charlottesville.

“We’re a lot like Charlottesville in a lot of ways,” he said. If anything like that ever did happen in Franklin, “Pastors would be the first in the city to come together.”

“Instead of waiting for something bad to happen, could we do something positive and not let that happen,” Riggs continued.

The pastors suggested four historical markers around the square to “help tell a fuller story of the Civil War.”

REST OF THE STORY/PHOTOS HERE:
https://brentwoodhomepage.com/frank...ling-slave-auctions-us-colored-troop-efforts/
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
6,819
Location
South Carolina
#3
Here's a solution to the Confederate monuments that MAY work!!!:

"Now, Riggs has come to a different solution. “Instead of being divisive and trying to take things down, why can’t we put some things up to tell a side of the story that hasn’t been told before?” he asked.
I agree. If the commemorative landscape is not balanced towards all sides, put up new monuments and markers rather than taking down existing ones.
 

Carronade

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
4,060
Location
Pennsylvania
#5
I agree. If the commemorative landscape is not balanced towards all sides, put up new monuments and markers rather than taking down existing ones.
You make a good point about balance. I suppose it could get to a point where public spaces are too crowded with monuments, and we would have to think about which to retain and which to relocate. I don't imagine many places are there yet, and if changes ever do need to be made, they should continue to strive for balance.

Commemorative plaques seem like a good idea, not too intrusive, and they can provide more information than a simple statue. Perhaps we'll make some progress one of these days!
 

archieclement

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
2,733
Location
mo
#6
This one sounds like an idea that might actually work. At the very least it is a attempt to try to tell all sides of the story.
Tend to agree, making it either or is a false narrative.

Say A this individual fought for a country trying to preserve slavery
or B this individual was a great military commander

Arguing either one was true....doesn't make the other any less true.
 

MattL

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
2,918
Location
SF Bay Area
#8
A good effort, though in my opinion I see some of these things differently, some random points


1) Statues or monuments meant to honor someone or something are very different than memorializing historical locations.

Statues or monuments are usually and mostly just later creations meant to represent the views about the subject at the time of the creation. The history they mostly memorialize are the views of the people who raised them and created them in whatever form they can take. On a scale of art vs history they are very high on the art side and low on the actual history side usually.

Memorializing locations where historical events however is completely different. Basically historical markers detailing slave auctions is no different than ones identifying battlefields. There is intrinsic undeniable historical value to identifying locations where significant historical events happened. Likewise these things are usually done in a way that is not meant to glorify the subject. For example marking a slave market shows no agenda on glorifying that slave market like marking a battlefield shows no agenda glorifying either side of that battle.

Monument art however usually carries the intrinsic agenda of the artist and people supporting it in a least two ways:

a) The person creation it and the artistic form it takes. Does a person stand proud in it, does a person look foolish, do they look defeated or strong etc. Art has an agenda and a message. The exception being the most literal forms of art that try to keep such things highly neutral, though even then often there is some agenda portrayed to honor or diminish some people.

b) The location of the art. This can overlap some with the other scenario if it's tied to a historically significant location, though unless it was a person who created statues at that location the act of raising a piece of art like a statue even at a historically significant location sends a message beyond the history.


2) I think the underlying motivation and goal is good and I credit them with taking the initiative


3) This is not me saying I don't think art for things you disagree with is bad btw, but art vs historical markers are in fact very different things with some overlap, though should be treated for what they are.


4) Art to me is public decoration and should be in the control of the locality, whether I like it or not. Historical markers are different and shouldn't be in the control of the locals in my opinion, though if there isn't local support there should be caution in ensuring information and marking are the priority not putting some sort of artistic presentation on said marked location.


5) If a goal is to counterbalance the presentation of different sides of history I think that's a good goal, even if only really considered after fearing losing something you personally value (we've had a long time to even the presentation out and places of high Black historical populations often still are very uneven, sorry but we need to accept the reality of what that says about our society and how important history is really to us vs the history that makes us warm and fuzzy). The onus is on the side that has benefited for centuries however. If your views have had great advantage and influence and you fear the other "side" gaining influence and altering what your side has portrayed with that influence then the responsibility is on you and your side to realize this, accept this and not hide from the reality of this, and put a great deal of effort forward to such a proposed solution of giving the other side the representation they haven't had.

So my personally opinion has always been that such a path is a good (though balancing statues with historical markers is a bit of an apples vs oranges, we do need more historical markers, but we need more art representing the other side as well if you truly want to balance things) option, the side of historical advantage needs to step up and push such initiatives with great support and recognition or face the consequences of equalizing forces done in a way they don't like. Basically if change is coming and what you want preserved was achieved through inequality and it's under threat of changing in a way you don't like, then you need to put the effort forward to find and or fully support alternate solutions.
 
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
14,055
Location
los angeles ca
#9
The issue of monuments should be a local not state or federal. Issue. If the people of Franklin want to go with their proposals to tell a different side of the story that's all fine and good. If the majority of the people of Memphis or Charlottesville want to tear down Confederate statutes thats their right. Each locality should make up their own minds about the monument issue.
Leftyhunter
 

archieclement

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
2,733
Location
mo
#10
The issue of monuments should be a local not state or federal. Issue. If the people of Franklin want to go with their proposals to tell a different side of the story that's all fine and good. If the majority of the people of Memphis or Charlottesville want to tear down Confederate statutes thats their right. Each locality should make up their own minds about the monument issue.
Leftyhunter
However a lot of em are in state or Federal parks or property, making it a state or federal issue in some cases...…
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
529
#11
Thanks for your positive comments. Those of us in Franklin who have been working on this believe these stories are important ones to tell and that the Confederate should never be removed. Both layers of history can exist in the same sphere. We are hoping Franklin might be a model for other communities across the country to confront difficult parts of their histories.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top