MONUMENT BLOG
  • Blog
  • About
  • Contact
  • Resources
  • Nomadic Memorial

Charlottesville (Part 1)

10/27/2018

 
Picture

Last August, one week before the Unite the Right rally, my design team mailed our resumes to Charlottesville, VA.  The city planned to hire a firm that would redesign Emancipation and Justice Parks. My team was interested in that work.  

Until earlier that year, the two grassy squares had been known as Lee and Jackson Parks, respectively.  But, in February of 2017, the City Council voted to remove the statues of their eponymous Confederate generals. The parks’ names were changed in June.

Then came the tiki-torches, the marchers in polo-shirts, the chanting.  Then Heather Heyer was murdered. The city rescinded their request for proposals.  No statue removal for now. No park design project.

Unite the Right was, in part, a response to the work that my team was planning to do for the city. We were going to redesign the parks with a post-Confederate identity.  

One year later, I wonder what might have been if we (or another team) had gotten the chance to redesign the parks.  In their original request for design proposals, the city made a clever decision: they wrapped the removal of the statues within a larger project of urban-design and civic engagement.  By focusing on the creation of something new and useful, the Charlottesville parks project was an opportunity to heal and move forward as a community.

Unfortunately, the environment necessary for that process to take place didn’t exist in Charlottesville at the time.  By voting to rename the parks “Emancipation and Justice” earlier that year, the city issued a direct rebuke to the Confederacy and it's twenty-first century sympathizers.  Rebel-shaming is not a good foundation for a community-based design process in central Virginia.  

In August, 2015, I wrote an entry in this blog advocating for the preservation of Confederate memorials.  At the time, I supposed that the destruction of those monuments was provocative and might lead to something terrible.  The birther, Donald Trump, had announced his presidential candidacy two months earlier and it seemed like a bad time to fan the flames of white paranoia.  I was wrong, and I was right.

I fear that I was right about the potential of memorial destruction to spark chaos.  Group-vandalism events like those that destroy Confederate statues and douse them with red paint are counterproductive.   They embolden the wildest racists, provide fodder for paranoid news hosts, and stoke the fears of white southern voters. 

I was wrong to advocate for the preservation of Confederate memorials in public places.  I didn’t appreciate the degree to which black Americans are terrorized by their governments’ display of those symbols.  I also hadn’t considered that the removal of Confederate memorials, through a democratic process, could be a powerful affirmation of democracy itself.  Memphis taught me that.

In 2017, I was thrilled by the maneuvering of the Memphis City Council in it’s removal of the Forrest statue from Health Sciences Park.  It was an inspired bit of governing. They found a loophole in the state law protecting the general's memorial and exploited it.  In so doing, they delivered what their constituents wanted and peacefully reshaped their city.

Still, I think that an even better model for the removal of these symbols can be built: one that is more focused on the future and more positive for the communities surrounding the statues.

In Charlottesville, my team was preparing to build that model: a process of community engagement to redesign its public space.  Our team was diverse and, in many ways, resembled the community that would use the parks. We planned to meet with citizens and to interview them. Then we planned to build places that served their daily needs, based on their feedback.   I regret that we didn’t have that chance.

Fortunately, Charlottesville will take another shot at this process.  A call for design proposals went out earlier this year. The design team has probably been selected.  When the they begin their work, I hope that they take the time to document their approach.  I hope that their process prioritizes honesty about the past and consensus-building around the community’s needs for the future. If they succeed, they may create a powerful new tool for deescalating the monument debate.


Postscript: The parks have been renamed again, to the less controversial "Market Street Park" and "Court Square Park."  Seems like a good first step toward consensus building and community design.  Now, about those statues...

MONUMENT WALK #3 - MONTRÉAL

12/18/2016

0 Comments

 

In August of 2015, my wife and I took a long walk around Montréal with a Kodak Funsaver disposable camera. I attempted to take as many photos of monuments as time and a limited supply of film would allow. She tolerated my enthusiasm for commemorative architecture and basked in the francophonic charm of the old city.

Sixteen months later, I shuffle through the photo prints and wonder what Montréal's public art landscape might teach the États-Unis in the aftermath of the 2016 election.

How is it that greatest French-speaking city in Québec has managed to tolerate so many British monuments for so long? In a province that has made more than one attempt to establish it's sovereignty from Canada and the Crown, why do Queen Victoria and her war heroes still loom over the streets?  Is it threats from Buckingham Palace?  Canadian politeness? Inertia?

​I expect that the reason the British monuments remain standing varies on a case-by-case basis, but I honestly don't know.  I don't even know any Québecois to ask. (Claude Cormier, if you ever read this, I would love to chat.)  So I'll speculate. This is my blog.  I may wonder aloud in ignorance if I want:

My hope, is that their continued existence points to Montréalers' empathy for the diverse histories of their neighbors.  The city's public art scene is an eclectic one.  The first of the above photos commemorates a very large tree - in situ.  JFK and Cardinals and British Admirals and the Olympics all get a plinth and a plaque. Regardless of their present-day popularity, everybody gets a statue!  

As anti-Confederate grafftti spread across memorials in the US this year, I wondered about it's impact on the coming election.  ​It is an unsettling thing to see your heroes maligned.  It might be disturbing enough to make voting for a crazy person who "gets you" seem rational.  I worried that an attack on Southern identity through it's symbols would contribute to white paranoia on November 8th.  I can't say if it did, but Breitbart continues to feature stories on the graffiti, so I suspect as much.  ​

Post-election, the American Left's power to topple monuments has receded.  Liberals need a reboot. They should reconsider their approach to conservative public art as a part of this process.  Less than 40 miles north of the border, progressive Montreal seems to tolerate its outdated statues.  Perhaps this makes it both a more neighborly and more stable place.
0 Comments
<<Previous

    Author

    Matt Sickle is a landscape architect living in Maryland, near Washington, D.C.

    He spends a lot of his time thinking about monuments and memorials.  

    Archives

    December 2019
    September 2019
    October 2018
    December 2016
    March 2016
    August 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    June 2014
    March 2014

    Categories

    All
    9/11 Memorial
    American Veterans Disabled For Life Memorial
    Bladensburg
    Canada
    Censorship
    Central Park
    Charlottesville
    Confederate Memorials
    FDR Memorial
    Fujifilm Quicksnap
    Ground Zero
    Irish Hunger Memorial
    Kodak Funsaver
    Landscape Architecture
    Lincoln Memorial
    MLK Jr. Memorial
    Monument Walk
    National Mall
    New York City
    Polaroid
    Veterans Memorial
    WWI Memorial


Copyright ©2010-2014 Matt Sickle.  Neither Text nor Images may copied, printed or otherwise disseminated without his express written permission.