Is it time for the Duke of Sutherland’s statue to come down now too?

[AgentProvocateur]

Now that Edward Colston’s statue has toppled, should the Duke of Sutherland’s be next?

It was discussed a few years ago but I think they decided to leave it standing as a reminder to everyone of what an enormous arsehole he was.

God, the number of ridiculous statues to fat old rich white men there are we will never be finished...

I particularly snort at those that claim to have been erected by public subscription / grateful tenants and the like.

Maybe they didn’t get the right YouTube instructions back then

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-15924649

I’d like to imagine that people in Scotland are clued up enough to know how much of an arse the Duke of Sutherland was.

I wouldn’t be averse to a new plaque somewhere on the plinth acknowledging that the fact it is still standing is controversial in the hopes that some might google it to work out the controversy.

The problem is that some people are making the decision - is that the way we want to go, someone offends some people and they get to decide it comes down.
What should happen is a proposal is made to remove it and people sign a petition to say yay or nay.

No of course not.

Choosing the version of history that they want to see is the kind of thing the Taliban do.

So if a group of American rednecks in the UK want to pull down the statue of Lincoln in Edinburgh should we allow that?

Of course it should come down and a memorial to the thousands moved on or killed .

@TrollTheRespawnJeremy a plaque with his history is a good idea.

The other thing is that by removing it you are removing uncomfortable and sad parts of history.
Should Auschwitz be turned into fields and woods?

I’d rather we created some statues of heroes that reflect our times, something positive as well as educating people with subsequent plaques on old statues - agree that the plaques need to happen. Many historical figures have long needed public qualification but we need to move forward as well.

Tearing them down hides the complexities of the past. Colston lived at a time when nobody questioned the slave trade - Dundas on the other hand was fully aware of the debate.

The only statues we seem to get nowadays are bears, kelpies, or weird mermaid type things....

Completely off the topic, it's made me so happy to think people also know of the Duke of Sutherland statue on Ben Bhraggie! My mum is from Sutherland and I have very, very happy memories of going up there each year from holidays. I still love it when I go. The beaches, the mountains, the lochs.... it's my ultimate happy place. Thank you for giving me a little holiday in my mind!

Only mythical bests or historical animals can pass the purity test! I have been ruminating on what it says about our society that it’s easier to tear down horrible bits of the past than agree on modern icons or even agree wording on plaques.

We can't erase history, but we can explain it. Better to put an explanatory plaque on the Colston/Sutherland/any statue to say what the person did, and let people draw their own conclusions.

As someone said - we're not going to turn Auschwitz into a lovely gardens, it's being used to help ensure those atrocities are never repeated.

Just thinking about trying to decide who should be portrayed on statues is difficult to say the least.
We are such a divided country.
Maybe a statue to the surgeon who died after warning about lack of ppe
as a remembrance of all the NHS staff who worked so hard.

I would be happy to see his statue taken down. It’s a bloody insult to Highlanders to see him up on the hill there.

But Auschwitz is not preserved as a celebration of what went on there, it is a memorial and commemorates those who suffered and died, not the perpetrators. Quite a different scenario.

But we are free to see the statue (any statue) and remember what an awful human being he was, whatever the original intention was, that’s the great thing about art and memory, nobody controls the individual’s perception or perceptions changing over time.

Is there a plaque on his statue? If not, I suspect many who see it won’t necessarily make the connection.

And yet even without a plaque (which should be there I agree) enough people attending BLM protests knew about Colston. A 30 second phone search returns key information.

Maybe.

It would be a public statement though. Symbolic.

I can’t get excited about a few key statues going - Colston, Sutherland or Dundas and perhaps Rhodes - as you say for a symbolic turning of our backs but in general I feel it’s better they stay to educate, as well as the question of what replaces them, who do we celebrate instead?

Auschwitz Birkenau is different to a statue as like all the Extermination Camps there are many mass graves where bodies & ashes were put.
Many ashes were ground up & mixed with asphalt or other building materials & this was used to create buildings & the infamous Ramp in Auschwitz Birkenau.
Ashes rained down on the camps & mixed with the mud.
So to destroy Auschwitz Birkenau which is actually a giant graveyard would actually play into the hands of the Nazis.

Sorry but I feel very strongly about it.

However a Statue is just a representation of a person in History.
The statue can be put the back room of a museum if it serves no relevance or offends but has some historical value.
However a lot of our statues are Victorian or newer.

The relevance of a Current or Historical figure depends on the regime & the Will of the people.

I'm glad the statue of Colston went, I only learnt it existed on Sunday & was shocked at its existence!!
Just going to google Sutherland.