Well it seems that the jury is in on the placement of statues in Chavez Plaza and the results are clear: Quetzalcotl is appreciated by practically no one; many would like to see Cesar Chavez honored in the historic plaza that bears his name. St. Joseph might also be a fine choice, but some are concerned that a Christian saint is too controversial, unlike the Aztec god – unfathomable but accurate.
Now let’s look at the reasoning or lack of it behind these conclusions. San Jose has large populations of Mexican-Americans, Catholics, Christians, and sane people. The selection of St. Joseph would signify the obvious: that the first inhabitants named the pueblo on the banks of the Guadalupe, after this noted religious, historic and biblical figure. I fail to see the imposition of anything but fact, and a touch of common sense, in this – the accurate rendition of the history of our city.
Oops, there’s the rub. It is a well known fact that to attempt to render our past clearly in any way is quite a dangerous prospect in San Jose’s recent days. Those who have attempted it have often rued the day that the first syllable of their position was uttered. There is little chance of anyone at City Hall having the courage to approach this issue, but hope springs eternal in our valley of infinite dreams.
How ironic that people come from all over the world – millions from Mexico – to live and reach for the American dream here when we refuse to honor our own history and what was held sacred by the early settlers. It is very sad – Hail Blessed Quetzalcotl, San Jose’s patron snake.
Next week “ Our most despicable” - Send in your nominations for the most despicable person or persons in San Jose history – you do not have to be dead to be considered.
Tom-
I appreciate your opinions, but you are being somewhat Eurocentric. When you write:
“…the first inhabitants named the pueblo … after this noted religious, historic and biblical figure” you are, of course, in error.
The first inhabitants were the indigenous people who thrived here many centuries before Europeans showed up and named the area in honor of a Christian Saint.
The people who gave San Jose its name were the area’s 2nd inhabitants.
Perhaps there should be public art to commemorate the lost culture of the native people who were the original inhabitants of this valley?
We can’t do a thing about the behavior of past despictable persons in San Jose history. My nomination for one of the most despicable persons in current San Jose public life is …. Never mind! He’ll be out of office in a little more than 18 months.
“Hail Blessed Quetzalcotl”?
That’s what I’ve been saying all along!! Now let’s get busy on my Quetzie-land vision (the Quetzie reptile house of giant snakes, the Quetzie serpentine water slide, …)
I’ll start by contacting my friends in LA to see if there are any movies or commercials that need a giant snake in a public setting for a back drop.
I still believe utilizing Fallon and Quetzalcotl facing off is a great story—
I agree with Cesar Chavez getting a statue.
While we are at it, Janet Gray should get a monument (first elected woman Mayor of a large city)—in fact, the entire City Council of a majority of women in a major city should be honored.
Al Ruffo certainly deserves to be honored. Norm Mineta—in addition to the airport was a key player in our history. David Packard, Bill Hewlett, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, John Scully, Dave Barram, Peter Uberoth Smothers Brothers while not always in San Jose proper—certainly have had an effect.
As far as despicable people—it is all relative. The gang of four were certainly no saints. Al Garza and Dave Runyon certainly gave the city some bad press.
But historically almost everyone involved in the Hart kidnapping and subsequent lynchings at St. James Park could be characterized as despicable—and it was far more damaging to our image.
Fallon, Fremont and some members of the Donner Party that ended up in San Jose, have some pretty bad tales. There are a few red-neck sheriffs that, at the very least, deserve honorable mention in the despicable category.
Some would say we could go back to Father Junipero Serra, whose missions are lauded by some, while others consider them monuments to genocide.
We have had many rogues, must we choose ony one champion?
By the time Tom and Rich get done putting up all the statues, there won’t be any room for PEOPLE in the plaza!
While there can be no doubt that the natives “who thrived here many centuries before Europeans showed up” were the Ohlones, there is absolutely no reason to believe that they were the area’s first people. The odds are overwhelming that they were merely the most recent possessors of this splendid valley, having dispossessed the previous people, who, most certainly, had dispossessed some tribe before them, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. To assume anything else is to assume that the first peoples of the Americas did not behave with the ruthless self-interest of every other human tribe known to history. This valley is, and always was, a prize. Can anyone really imagine a tribe voluntarily abandoning it? Or another not coveting it? Given the scarcity of hospitable land plus the geographic barriers of the ocean to the west and the mountains to the east, it is a certainty that during and after the centuries of the great human migration this valley saw not only many a contentious battle, but also the occasional ethnic cleansing.
The Ohlone were here to meet the white man only because their forefathers had won the last big battle. That we know nothing of the tribe that was here before them is due to one reason: the Ohlones did nothing to honor or preserve its memory.
While the indigenous history of this area should not be discarded, it also shouldn’t be treated with undue reverence. The Ohlone culture is a local remnant—no part of our daily lives is influenced by it, no aspect of our future depends on it. Let’s get over it and enjoy this place like we own it.
Finfan,
I assume that you are referring to post #1. If so note that I referred to “the indigenous people” and not specifically to the group known as the Ohlones. That would cover all people who lived in the valley prior to the arrival of Europeans.
However, since you raised the issue, can you cite archeological evidence that suggests an earlier population in the Santa Clara Valley? I am not aware of any.
My point, in response to Tom’s blog, was that if monuments are to be erected for being “first” it would be unfair and inaccurate to give this label to the European settlers who are by any reasonable measure relative newcomers.
Meanwhile…what a beautiful day. Nice park weather!
Here’s a plain fact: The Aztecs never lived here. So why was money spent to plop Quetzie in the Plaza? Once again, there’s no rhyme or reason to any development in this town, be it cultural or otherwise.
Tom has made some good suggestions but they’ll need private financing to be realized. There will be howls of protest over spending money on public art. Because there are still too many backward types living among us who would just as soon have SJ remain the world’s largest bedroom community.
Mr. Flabeets,
In correcting Mr. McEnery you directed to his attention the indigenous people who were here in the centuries prior to the arrival of the first Europeans—an indirect identification of the Ohlone, as they are the only people who fit that description.
I perceive your request of me for archeological supporting evidence as less than genuine for a number of reasons. First, evidence from any of the early tribes that passed through here thousands of years ago would be so primitive as to be impossible to link with a “modern” tribe. Second, were I in possession of such evidence I’d have had no reason to introduce my argument with the words “the odds are overwhelming,” a qualification you conveniently failed to notice. And lastly, that despite your feigned interest in the subject matter, you completely sidestepped the most compelling element of my argument, that of how we are informed of the behaviors and probable histories of even unknown peoples by the aggressive, competitive nature of all human tribes.
Your professed commitment for historical accuracy appears to be secondary to your desire to counter-attack. At no point did I argue that the first humans here were anything other than indigenous people. My point was, and is, that we have no way of knowing the precise origins, physical stature, language, culture, or genetic fate of those who truly were the first on this land. It very may well have been a tribe that died-out. First here is unknowable—knowledge forever lost to history and quite insignificant when compared to the remarkable achievements of the European late-comers, the very people to whom we owe our bountiful heritage.
The hell with Ceasar Chavez. You’ve again started some sort of fight here in beautiful downtown San Jose. All you have to do is mention something like this and the fight starts even without Fallon. I say put up a statue of President George Bush for his courage to do something and not just fiddle while the US burned.
Finfan,
“Counter-attack?” “Professed commitment?” Did I hit a nerve? If so I am sorry to have offended.
You offered a theory but no evidence to support your assertion of an indigenous population prior to the Ohlone. Despite what you suggest in #9 even nomadic cultures leave traces of their presence. In the Southwest for example there is ample evidence of earlier cultures that were replaced by more dominant groups. To the best of my knowledge we just don’t find this in the soil of the Santa Clara Valley. But again, if you can offer evidence to the contrary I would welcome the opportunity to see it.
The history of the native people of this region suggests that they were typically peaceful with very few armed conflicts. There was good reason for this, the area offered such abundant food and good climate there was little reason for warlike competition. Raiding parties from distant areas did not need to come this far to get what they sought. Your “compelling argument” does not seem to hold up when applied to the Ohlones.
There is no question that the “European late-comers” have created the heritage that its descendents enjoy today. But that was not the issue. The discussion began with Tom’s blog regarding proposed public art honoring “the first inhabitants” of what we now call our home. The European settlers clearly do not qualify for that designation.
I would love to have a statue that symbolizes everything to everyone and does not offend but I honestly, I would just like something nice looking. The Fallon statue would have looked so nice in that triangle piece of land! Ceasar Chavez does seem like an easy choice though, right?
HJ, if the alternative is a statue of George W Bush, I’ll embrace Quetzalcoatl and never let go!
14 is a Goofy idea!
Our valleys indiginous field mice do more to keep donwtown streets free of garbage then the city does.
Putting up a statue of a mouse will offend them, cause lawsuits and force many mice to leave!
I think the only thing you can put in that park is a statue of Mickey Mouse. With everything else, someones going to have a problem with it and end up costing the city monney.
I don’t know, Los Gaots has statues of cats, and the feline population there seems to be doing OK.
All this bickering over something that is to most residents not a priority. San Jose has real issues to deal with.
Putting a statue of an Aztec God, is just lame as stated above no Aztec’s ever inhabited San Jose.
Both Saint Joseph and Father Junipero Serra do promote the fact that Europeans again took over and area by forcing it’s indigenous population to join them of get out one way or another.
The park is named for Cesar Chavez, who most of us who are older that 25 know of and who’s struggle was one of courage and significance.
Mickey Mouse though not from San Jose is I’m sure well loved by most residents.
My suggestion is that we put up a non descript statue, one that has not face or gender then each person can individually decide for themselves who it represents to them. This way everyone gets the statue of their choice.
No can we please move on!
Couple of breaking Quetzie announcements..
The city has agreed to set up a Quetzie webcam so that citizens will have a webpage from which they can check out Quetzie at various times during the day.
Also in this years budget will be funding for equipping Quetzie with motion activated audio (and a webcam) in it’s mouth to emit terrific hissing sounds and capture the classic expressions and comments of passing pedestrians.
Just a small part of the exciting sound+vision Quetzie-Land extravaganza that will be unfolding on the island. More developments to come…
That’s ,OK, MAL, no-one comes downtown anyway..at least not after dark.
John Michael O’Connor
No, Mark T, we’re not even near the world’s largest bedroom community. That honor belongs to that amalgam from the Techachapis to the Mexican border.
John Michael O’Connor
ONE THING FOR SURE IS THIS PLACE WE ALL CALL HOME HAS BEEN DETROYED BY PAVING AHD BUILDING BEYOND ITS NEED ,THIS WAS THE BEST PLACE TO GROW FRUIT AND PRODUCE AND NOW ALL THAT GROWS IS GREED AND TO OUT DO AND TO DESTROY WHAT LITTLE IS LEFT (COYOTE VALLEY ,COTTLE FARM )AND BUILD AS MANY HOUSES AND NO PLACE TO SHOP ,THE SAFEST LARGE CITY IS TRANFOMING INTO AN UNDESIRABLE PLACE TO LIVE , AND THE CURRANT MISMANAGEMENT AND MISLEADING SO CALLED LEADERS ARE UP TO THERE NECK WITH JUST ENOUGH TIME LEFT TO FALL FLAT ON ALL THAT PAVEMENT TIME IN