to think removing certain statues and renaming certain street names is not erasing our history?

[chomalungma]

It's just not celebrating people who are seen as controversial.
People can still learn about these people in books.
In films
At school.

It's just that they aren't being celebrated by having public recognition and the honour of a statue or a street name.

I would link to a story - but there would be so many of them as the Government (and certain media organisations) seem to think that it's a war on our history.

I guess a lot of it is down to the person being celebrated. And whether that celebration is still deemed 'worthy' 100s of years later.

Statues have been removed in the past for a range of reasons. I wonder how many of the Victorian statues will still be up in 200 years time?

I would far rather we focus on putting up statues of the forgotten people of the past. There’s a beautiful statue outside Manchester Piccadilly of soldiers who were blinded. Jarrow has an amazing statue of the Jarrow Marchers

That's a good point. There are many people from our past who made a difference to our today and who are not taught about at school or remembered with statues etc.

I would far rather we focus on putting up statues of the forgotten people of the past.

This is my position too. Let's add our layer of history to the ones that have before rather than to attempt to sanitise the past.

That smacks of rewriting the history books

Do you think that statues should have plaques etc putting things in context so the history people learn is the actual history?

I wonder in what century many of the statues we know will be removed?

🤷🏻‍♀️

Hardly any history is taught in school because there is very little time to devote to it and Britain has a lot of History. People put far too much emphasis on how much of history kids are going to learn in school.

@partyatthepalace

Of course it isn’t.

Many of them will end up in museums, and yes will continued to be read about and studied.

If they end up in museums they will be mainly seen by middle class people. If there is a statue in a street everyone can see it and more chance of a child saying, 'Who is that?'

So do people think that statue of Jimmy Saville should have stayed up in the Scotstoun leisure centre then?

@chomalungma

Possibly, or we could just neutralise the language. E.g. 'this statue commerates the glorious Joe Bloggs whose beneficence build this area of town' we could substitute for 'this area of town was largely funded from the personal wealth of Joe Bloggs. His impact in developing area X was great but his fortunes have also been linked with X and X, making him a controversial figure in the 21st century'.

What would be wrong with something like that? Still historically accurate, people still learn the contexts of their local history but it wouldn't involve the slippery slope of tidying history up.

That should be the decision of the people of Scotstoun.

If they end up in museums they will be mainly seen by middle class people. If there is a statue in a street everyone can see it and more chance of a child saying, 'Who is that

So a plaque explaining what they did without any 'whitewashing' would be good?

I know there are lots of statues to (normally military personnel and Victorian men) and I have no idea who they are.

The Victorians liked their statues.

So do people think that statue of Jimmy Saville should have stayed up in the Scotstoun leisure centre then?

No. I suspect nobody thinks that.

@corythatwas

So do people think that statue of Jimmy Saville should have stayed up in the Scotstoun leisure centre then?

It wouldn't have lasted because ordinary people would have vandalised it. Saville was almost universally reviled and part of recent history. Just like Sadam Hussein's statue was torn down by the people he oppressed.

So a plaque explaining what they did without any 'whitewashing' would be good?

Written by whom? A professional historian? I have no problem with that.

Hardly any history is taught in school because there is very little time to devote to it.

When I got to uni I couldn't believe how through all my schooling, I'd only skimmed the surface. And after moving to Wales, I learned a lot more about English/British/Welsh history.

All I remember learning about in English secondaries was the world wars and Henry VIII's wives.

There are lots of Victorian statues because much of our built environment was created by the Victorians.

[quote ChristmasSexyTime]@chomalungma

Possibly, or we could just neutralise the language. E.g. 'this statue commerates the glorious Joe Bloggs whose beneficence build this area of town' we could substitute for 'this area of town was largely funded from the personal wealth of Joe Bloggs. His impact in developing area X was great but his fortunes have also been linked with X and X, making him a controversial figure in the 21st century'.

What would be wrong with something like that? Still historically accurate, people still learn the contexts of their local history but it wouldn't involve the slippery slope of tidying history up.[/quote]
I can't see any problem with that

What would be wrong with something like that? Still historically accurate, people still learn the contexts of their local history but it wouldn't involve the slippery slope of tidying history up

So a statue of Nelson Mandela might read, “...was instrumental in bringing about the end of South African apartheid and was the first Black man to lead his nation. Linked with multiple bombings in the 1960s...” or similar?

Something tells me ‘not gonna happen’.

Compulsory History education in Secondary school is two lessons a week for three years. So you probably have time to learn nine topics.

Henry VIII and his wives is probably one of the nine most important events because it is more properly known as the Reformation. It had a huge and lasting impact, not least in the existence of Northern Ireland, one of the four major parts of the U.K.

It wouldn't have lasted because ordinary people would have vandalised it. Saville was almost universally reviled and part of recent history. Just like Sadam Hussein's statue was torn down by the people he oppressed

That makes sense to me. A person's contemporaries should decide. Savile's contemporaries have decided that his statue should be removed. I think that's fair enough.

Stripesnomore
Hitler isn’t a controversial figure. There’s near universal agreement that he was a bad person and an incompetent failure.
AStudyinPink
This is just daft. There’s no public will to celebrate Hitler.

I so wish you were both right; but there are plenty of neo-Nazis under one name and another who don't agree, and do celebrate him. They can for instance be seen wearing 6mwne tee-shirts at rallies, and driving their motorbikes to the statue of Herman the German because they associate it with Hitler.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermannsdenkmal
That's a rather pathetic place in some ways: the hut where the builder lived while it was erected has been preserved, and there are a lot of signatures with the SS symbol beside them carved into it, with dates in the late thirties. All those poor, stupid, dead little bigoted jugend....

My daughter took me there while she was living in Westphalia, and warned me not to be upset about the Nazi salutes and tattoos I was likely to see while we were there.

Happy to see statues removed - stick them in a museum and contextualise them with the balanced story of what their contribution to humanity was in their lifetime. Let the balanced history inform people and help them judge.
Not in favour of putting historical figures on plinths and in places of honour if civilised and humanitarian principles show they should not be celebrated.

The whole concept of statues will, at some distant enlightened future date - and if humanity ever survives and evolves long enough to get there - be regarded as fucking stupid. In the same way a typical adult in our society views a teenagers bedroom plastered with posters of rock bands and political slogans as a bit of silly adolescent phase and somewhat immature.

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime

I meant in UK public spaces. If people want to erect ridiculous statues to Hitler on their own private land it’s no skin off my nose, but in public in the UK, there’s no appetite for it.

Something tells me ‘not gonna happen’.

What would be a good alternative? Maybe just putting their name with no blurb whatsoever? And then it's up to people to google that person themselves?

Might be an easier alternative?

What would be a good alternative? Maybe just putting their name with no blurb whatsoever? And then it's up to people to google that person themselves?

I’m not particularly bothered either way. I don’t read what’s written in a plinth and imagine it‘s objective so it doesn’t concern me what’s written there, 99% of the time.