A Statue for Our City—Or Two

“Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it” is a favorite quote of many who discuss history. Most likely said first—and best—by poet and philosopher, George Santayana, we should remember it in San Jose.

In a country where the lack of knowledge about our history is well known, where many high school students think we fought England in World War Two and cannot identify the century when the Civil War was fought, and where our leadership in the White House regularly mistakes historical precedent for partisan attacks, it is not surprising that the sentiment behind Santayana’s wisdom would elude most. In our city, we must try and do better.

I recently read a report about “changes” in a statue of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. destined for a new monument in Washington DC. It will soon be the centerpiece of a great memorial, standing twenty-eight untroubled feet tall. Comparing the statue to the civil rights leader’s image it was modeled on, it seems that his brow furrows have been erased and his face looks less troubled.  In addition, the pen in his left hand is gone, and a scroll has been put in its place. Criticisms have arisen because of these transgressions and because the sculptor selected to do it was Chinese, not American.

Here in our city, no small changes accompanied our historical art program. A small group and a political structure ignorant of history just jettisoned the entire thing. Now, at last, there is hope.

A new wind is blowing at City Hall. There are a few, for now unnamed, members of the city council that want to honor and respect our history. They are ready to place historical art, based on the men and women who built this city, in their proper place with no political correctness allowed—just the facts and the lessons to be learned. 

Either you tell history straight and honestly, or you engage in the absurd situation of being afraid—no, terrified—of showing anything but tinker toys and colorful animals.  In the next few months, some at the city will take the lead to tell our history—wonderful and amazing, sad and tragic—in an honest way.  I hope many, starting now, begin the recommendations of who and what should be commemorated.  I can hardly wait.

19 Comments

  1. To accomplish anything like your goal, the entire Office of Cultural Affairs would need to be cleaned out, top to bottom. They supervised the weird structures around the new City Hall which memorialized almost every aspect of San Jose except they “forgot” to symbolize the national location of the new City Hall. All the old-fashioned aspects of art (gender, race, historical wrongs) were the spine of that art project—no space to mention the USA however.

    If the Office of Cultural Affairs is cleaned up, let’s give it a new name. Its bolsheviki-style name practically calls out for the anti-American types who dominate it.

  2. Tom—

    I’m wondering why the Fallon statue on W. Julian is not illuminated at night with uplighting?

    I know that statue was once controversial (before my time), but it seems to me that since we are displaying it we should do so to better effect. Whatever one’s thoughts about Fallon, it is a pleasant looking statue in the classic mold located in a well-traveled gateway into the downtown, but it’s effectively invisible after dark. 

    I imagine you would agree we should light the Fallon statue.  And perhaps if you know why this hasn’t been done already you can educate me. 

    If, as I suspect, there is no public funding for it, perhaps a private Friends of the Fallon Statue could be formed to raise the funds to illuminate the statue.  I would be willing to make a contribution.

  3. Sorry Tom, it was not the “leadership in the White House regularly mistakes historical precedent for partisan attacks.” It was the current democratic front-runner, who got a bug up his ass because the president reminded everybody about a misguided Republican Senator, William Borah of Idaho who served in the 1930s.

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/05/17/late_senator_figures_in_2008_presidential_furor/

    Tom, you complain about ignorance of history, and then demonstrate the same thing in the same post. Shame on you.

  4. I can’t help but think that ML King would not want a statue built for himself…just as I think that Chavez would have been offended that libraries and public offices that service the people he championed are closed to “honor him.”
    In terms of public art in San Jose, I think that many of the “pieces” around are city are instructive and make a statement…I find the “parade of floats” around city hall to be “tacky,” and a waste of public funds, complimenting the most extravagent, and expensive public building west of the Mississippi.  The Quetzequotal statue reminds every that drives by it, that they should clean up after their animals.  (No offense to any who worship the Sun God).

    Pete Campbell

  5. Hugh –  George Bush is the most historically ignorant President in recent memory – I don’t know a lot of subjects, but I do know 20th Century European history, and did a Masters’ Thesis on revolutionary movements (just a bit of bragging on a long forgotten degree,forgive me) and how they build on the arrogance and stupidity of big shots like Bush, Rummy, and so many others either dense or moral cowards – and your credentials, Hugh?  TMcE

    Don
      Lighting on the Fallon and many other works of art would be great – let’s discuss w. Sam Liccardo. Also, notice the flag, American, of course, does not have a rope – in the original, probably lost in the years of “Oakland exile”, I guess.  T

  6. Tom:

    You’re suffering from an extreme case of BDS here, and you didn’t refute my point that you were just plain wrong about the example you cite in your original post. Bush did not mention any current politician in his recent speech but he did refer to a dead Senator from his own party. For a current presidential candidate to take offense at this shows more about that candidate than it does about Bush.

  7. Yo,

    I think i’m the only person who admires the dog crap statue at Plaza Park.  Really, give me 100 pieces of crap over 100 white guys on horses any time.  Really, I HATE to make yet another stupid SJ/SF comparison, but man talk about public art!  SF probably has the best collection in the country.  Even their trolley stations look artistic.  Each piece stands out, not that I love every piece, but at least it makes me think about it.

    PLEASE no more statues of people.  They’re boring, give us something to talk about.  Something that we can look at up close that will give us a different perspective that when we drive by it at 35 miles per hour. 

    How many of you who complain about the Park God have actually taken the time to see it up close, or compared it to other pieces it mimics in Mexico.  You might, just might, just might, gain a new respect for it.  At least it gives us something to talk about.

  8. If we had any respect for our agricultural heritage we wouldn’t have encouraged the destruction of thousands of acres of orchards and farms to make way for high density housing.
    Perhaps a bronze sculpture of an apricot tree could be placed next to City Hall.(it could use some trees). Get a developer to pay for it out of the proceeds from their latest project.

  9. Hugh – I do not know what “BDS” is – perhaps your degree from some notable institution that provides some of your knowledge on history and political thought?
              And ‘a real city’ – I am not among those many who feel inferior because San Jose is not NY, or SF or Paris. San Jose is to me and my family, the best place on the planet, full of hope and optimism. Many feel the same, even though it is occasionally run poorly.  Smell the roses a bit, Hugh.  TMcE

  10. Dale #2—The Office of Cultural Affairs needs to be eliminated entirely.  It “employs” 19 people. What’s it’s annual budget? How well into six figures does its Director make (not earn, make)?What on earth can 19 people DO to come up with little noticeable results?  In a time when we need lots more cops, more firefighters, and our roads absolutely SUCK, we don’t have $$$ to waste on an Office of Cultural Affairs.  It’s yet another example of the difference between wants and needs.

  11. Tom:

    BDS = Bush Derangement Syndrome
    http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=6A2ED953-7F19-4A6D-B095-CF59269B817B

    In your case, BDS manifests itself in the above post. Even though the topic is statues in San Jose, you can’t help making a false statement about the President’s quote of a long-dead Republican senator during a speech in Israel. Exactly how does that relate to public art in San Jose? And all of your snide comments about my credentials or supposed lack of them doesn’t change the fact that I was right. Your rant in response #7 does not refute my point. For the record, my Master’s is in Transportation, which makes us both equally qualified to comment about the president.

  12. Hugh – I stand corrected. I will listen to your opinions carefully in the future – on transportation. Perhaps a VTA appointment is in your future too.  Now back to history – it can be a good guide, but a poor master to those who use it incorrectly with “appeasement” and “Hitler”,  etc., as political punch lines. Bush is clueless on history, and therefore, would certainly support a statute – of Rummy perhaps. Get my point,now?
    TMcE

  13. Tom:

    You write, “Bush is clueless on history, and therefore, would certainly support a statute – of Rummy perhaps.”
    I’m no fan of Rumsfeld, but Ralph Peters can explain it better than I can. See http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0606.peters.html

    But the Bush-bashing in your column was still wrong. He made a valid point
    Here is the quote that you find so objectionable:

    “There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It’s natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.
    Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is—the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history. Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it.”

    James Taranto adds “Note what is absent from the speech: any reference to Barack Obama, to any other Democrat or to the Democratic Party. As we noted in 2006, when a speech by then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld prompted a similar response from Sen. Harry Reid, the unnamed U.S. senator to whom the president alludes is William Borah of Idaho, who was elected in 1907 and served until his death in 1940. Borah was a Republican.” see http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121094989664298777.html

    Kimberley A. Strassel points out
    “Today’s Obama, all-but-nominee, is pitching to a broad American audience less keen to legitimize Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who provides weapons that kill American soldiers. The senator clumsily invited this debate when he took great umbrage to President Bush’s recent criticism of appeasers (which, in a wonderfully revealing moment, Democrats instantly assumed meant them). Mr. Obama has since been scrambling to neutralize his former statement.”
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121149958822915813.html?mod=todays_columnists

    Again, this was not a “partisan attack” as you call it, no matter how much the Obama campaign would like us to believe that it was.

  14. #12 Tom,
     
      Welcome back home. When you were Mayor you use to say San Jose was a “Great City” and I`m glad to hear you still believe it.
      San Francisco is a Tourist driven City, San Jose is not. I enjoy visiting San Francisco as much as anyone else but I prefer living in San Jose where we have a great “quality of life” because we have great neighborhoods.
        We have problems work out like traffic and better education support in our local grammer,middle and high schools. But many residents in our city are aware of these two area`s that need improvement and are working hard to get our leaders attention, making sure they keep their eyes on the ball.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *