Monuments are structures that are built to honor a person, event or concept. They serve as visual reminders of our past and often become tourist attractions in their own right. However, not all monuments are created equal. Some have become controversial due to the actions or beliefs associated with the individuals they represent.
One such monument is the Christopher Columbus statue located in Columbus Circle in New York City. For decades, this statue stood tall in celebration of Columbus’s discovery of America. However, over time his legacy has been called into question due to his treatment of indigenous peoples upon arrival on American shores.
In recent years, there have been numerous calls for the removal of this statue and others like it across the country. While some argue that removing these statues erases history, others believe it is time to reevaluate who we choose to honor in our public spaces.
One alternative proposed by artist Kehinde Wiley is a monument dedicated to everyday people – specifically black Americans – who were instrumental in building America but often go unrecognized for their contributions. His proposed monument features a young black man dressed in streetwear sitting atop a horse much like traditional equestrian statues found throughout America.
Another proposal comes from journalist Oliver Bateman who suggests replacing Confederate monuments with statues honoring famous southerners who fought against slavery and segregation such as Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks and James Meredith.
While these proposals may seem radical at first glance, they highlight an important conversation about whose legacies we choose to celebrate and how we choose to do so.
But monuments aren’t just about celebrating historical figures or events; they can also be used as political statements. One example is Budapest’s Liberty Statue which was erected after World War II by Hungary’s Communist government as an anti-fascist symbol of liberation from Nazi occupation.
However, after Hungary transitioned to democracy following the fall of communism in 1989, many saw the Liberty Statue as a relic of its communist past. In response, a new monument was erected in 2014 depicting Hungary as an eagle being attacked by Germany’s imperial eagle.
This new monument drew criticism from many who saw it as revisionist history and an attempt to downplay Hungary’s role in the Holocaust. The controversy surrounding these monuments highlights how symbols can be used to rewrite history or push political agendas.
Even seemingly benign monuments can become controversial. Take for example, the “Fearless Girl” statue installed in front of Wall Street’s Charging Bull sculpture. While initially celebrated for its feminist message, some have criticized it for being corporate sponsored and not truly challenging Wall Street’s male-dominated culture.
Monuments also face threats from natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina which destroyed New Orleans’ iconic Robert E. Lee statue or Mexico City’s Angel of Independence monument which suffered significant damage during the 2017 earthquake.
In conclusion, monuments serve as visual reminders of our past but they are not immune to controversy or criticism. As society evolves, so too must our public spaces and how we choose to honor those who came before us. Whether through proposals for new monuments celebrating underrepresented groups or debates over existing ones with problematic legacies, it is important that we continue to question what messages we want these structures to convey and whose stories deserve recognition.