On our recent trip to the American Cemetery in Normandy I was struck by something I learned. When bodies were buried there were two choices. A cross, a symbol of Christianity or a Star of David, the symbol of Judaism. If you weren't Christian you got a star. Think about that, a person who was Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, etc or even of no faith was buried under a symbol that was part of the faith expression of another faith. That was part of the world we lived in but it brings up an interesting point. Symbols do matter. But symbolic meaning of symbols change.
Recently there have been many incidents when symbols have been the center of controversy. At Indiana University School of Public Health a classroom had an early 20th century tile installation that included a variety of cultural symbols. One being a swastika. Now the swastika was a symbol of many cultures and often is seen as a symbol of a celestial object or of peace before the 1930s. In fact many old churches and synagogues have a form of it carved into friezes. When I was a kid, I would visit the Fredric Remington Art Museum that included a recreating of the artist's study. In the study were a set of spoons with swastikas. It was always stunning as from and early age that symbol was a symbol of hate. But Remington died in 1909 so he wasn't a Nazi. But the symbol has taken on a life of its own. Having that in a classroom will cause the same horrifying reaction I had as an elementary school kid seeing that symbol so prominently displayed. With the rise of antisemitism it is clear that IU chose wisely to eliminate it. Now some say we can put an explanation on a plaque next to it but let's be clear, people don't read those very often. In fact one of my favorite stories is from the Cincinnati Zoo's Gibbon exhibit. You are greeted with a large sign that says "It's Not a Monkey" and goes on to explain the difference between a monkey and an ape. In a brief encounter, I counted 20 people call them monkeys while standing next to the sign. For the rest of the day whenever we encountered something we would say, "It's not a monkey".
Hijacked symbols are all over the place. The Confederate Flag as it is called today, the crossed blue lines with stars on a red background is synonymous with the south though it was part of two of the three adopted flags of the Confederacy, known as the Southern Cross, it was never official as a stand alone flag. Versions were used as unit flags including and square banner by Robert E. Lee. In the post Civil War era it was used as a shorthand symbol of the Confederacy and at one time it was used as the flag of the Dixiecrats, the conservative southern democrats who broke off as a segregationist party. In the south states have adopted the Southern Cross as part of state flags. I was in Georgia when the debate about the flag led to the design without it being prominent and later changing to the current flag. The irony of the current flag is that it is basically the 1st official flag of the Confederacy with Georgia Coat-of-Arms in the center of the circle of stars. But the Confederate Flag we think of today is used in many ways but is seen by many as a symbol of racism, slavery and white supremacy because it was adopted by the people who promoted such things. Even if adopted by those looking to promote their southern heritage from Alabama football programs to Lynyrd Skynyrd to states-rights advocates, the symbol cannot escape the fact it was often flown over the bodies of lynched men and women, carried at cross--burnings and used to strike fear in the hearts of non-whites in many places in the country. Calls to remove it from state house polls and displays in schools make sense, even if the intent of the flag is not explicitly racist.
One argument against eliminating symbols from the everyday culture is that we are erasing our history. This was used as monuments were taken down in many places in the south because they were of Confederate leaders. Funny thing was many were put up during the Civil Rights Era to intimidate blacks seeking to be seen as equal. History was never the intent. But I would argue we could eliminate every sign of the Confederacy in public life and we would still know about it if we study our history. Growing up if someone turned on you, you called them a Benedict Arnold. He was as much a standard for traitor as Judas from the Christian Bible. Benedict Arnold was a Major General who fought with valor and was injured at the Battle of Saratoga for Continental Army. There is a monument to his fighting there, but it is a boot and bears no name. When he promised the British West Point he gave up the right to have his heroics lauded in our country. While some wanted to honored his skills and cunning they did it without name. Yet even today we know who he was. We don't need symbols in public places to know our history. We have the stories.
The argument here is also one of the 1st amendment as the statues and all symbols are a form of speech. That is true they are, but the government is not outlawing the statues, nor the symbols. In the case of state flags that have tried to eliminate imagery that is seen as hurtful or taking down of statues, the government is simply not endorsing those things. If in any city you wanted to put up a statue of Robert E. Lee or Adolph Hitler or Carrot top on your private land, and the government tries to stop you, I will fight for your right to do it. (just don't make me defend Carrot Top).
In recent weeks however the attacks on symbols has been really called into question. When Nike wanted to put out a shoe with the Betsy Ross flag on it. A flag with a blue field with a circle of 13 stars and 13 stripes alternating red and white Colin Kapernick, a spokesperson for the brand, objected. He called it a symbol of racism. It has been adopted by some some racist organization and it is similar to the 1st Confederate flag I mentioned earlier. Nike withdrew the shoe and of course the conservatives lost their minds. At first I sided with Nike, if that symbol truly does generate some concern that it would become white nationalist attire I get that others would feel uncomfortable promoting, especially with a company that has banked on a large African-American following for brand loyalty. But as I think more, there could have been a middle ground. But worse is the actor Chris Pratt. I will start by saying I know little about Chris Pratt, he has made conservative comments. Recently he wore a t-shirt of an American flag with the Gadsden Flag symbol of a snake and the words Don't Tread On Me. A flag from the Revolutionary War and I have to tell you one of my favorites as a kid, it has recently been used by far right hate groups, Two white supremacists used the flag to drape the bodies of two police officers they killed in Las Vegas recently. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission says the flag may, in some circumstances, be racial offensive in the workplace. But there is no indication the Pratt is a aligned with the thinking of white nationalists. But just wearing the shirt bring some serious criticism.
Symbols tell us things about the person or organization sharing it. But rarely do we get the whole story from a quick glance. As a culture we have always made decisions about what is publicly appropriate and what is not. While our 1st amendment protects us from government telling us what symbols we can use or promote, the community we live in tells us what is acceptable. The local businessman who decorates his store with swastikas will likely never get the Chamber of Commerce award in most American cities, but if we outlawed is decorations we are going in the wrong direction.
Sometimes the outrage about a symbol is seen as what it is, a fringe cause. Currently there is a story of a woman calling a Spiderman art installation a symbol of the Devil. Should the art piece be removed for one person's misunderstanding? It is worth however taking into account the audience who has to see the symbols we do have around us. A swastika in a classroom can heighten anxiety in a student whose family story involved many people killed by the Nazis. A Confederate flag still gives many African-Americans a visceral reaction. There are many other ways that symbols can make people uncomfortable and it is just human and sometimes good business to acknowledge that. (Nike stock rose after the flag controversy). Public sentiment will always shape what is acceptable expression in symbols, words and deeds. Sometimes for good and sometimes for nonsense. But as long as it is public sentiment that is driving the discussion we are comfortable, but if the government starts to decide we are in danger.
Recently there have been many incidents when symbols have been the center of controversy. At Indiana University School of Public Health a classroom had an early 20th century tile installation that included a variety of cultural symbols. One being a swastika. Now the swastika was a symbol of many cultures and often is seen as a symbol of a celestial object or of peace before the 1930s. In fact many old churches and synagogues have a form of it carved into friezes. When I was a kid, I would visit the Fredric Remington Art Museum that included a recreating of the artist's study. In the study were a set of spoons with swastikas. It was always stunning as from and early age that symbol was a symbol of hate. But Remington died in 1909 so he wasn't a Nazi. But the symbol has taken on a life of its own. Having that in a classroom will cause the same horrifying reaction I had as an elementary school kid seeing that symbol so prominently displayed. With the rise of antisemitism it is clear that IU chose wisely to eliminate it. Now some say we can put an explanation on a plaque next to it but let's be clear, people don't read those very often. In fact one of my favorite stories is from the Cincinnati Zoo's Gibbon exhibit. You are greeted with a large sign that says "It's Not a Monkey" and goes on to explain the difference between a monkey and an ape. In a brief encounter, I counted 20 people call them monkeys while standing next to the sign. For the rest of the day whenever we encountered something we would say, "It's not a monkey".
Hijacked symbols are all over the place. The Confederate Flag as it is called today, the crossed blue lines with stars on a red background is synonymous with the south though it was part of two of the three adopted flags of the Confederacy, known as the Southern Cross, it was never official as a stand alone flag. Versions were used as unit flags including and square banner by Robert E. Lee. In the post Civil War era it was used as a shorthand symbol of the Confederacy and at one time it was used as the flag of the Dixiecrats, the conservative southern democrats who broke off as a segregationist party. In the south states have adopted the Southern Cross as part of state flags. I was in Georgia when the debate about the flag led to the design without it being prominent and later changing to the current flag. The irony of the current flag is that it is basically the 1st official flag of the Confederacy with Georgia Coat-of-Arms in the center of the circle of stars. But the Confederate Flag we think of today is used in many ways but is seen by many as a symbol of racism, slavery and white supremacy because it was adopted by the people who promoted such things. Even if adopted by those looking to promote their southern heritage from Alabama football programs to Lynyrd Skynyrd to states-rights advocates, the symbol cannot escape the fact it was often flown over the bodies of lynched men and women, carried at cross--burnings and used to strike fear in the hearts of non-whites in many places in the country. Calls to remove it from state house polls and displays in schools make sense, even if the intent of the flag is not explicitly racist.
One argument against eliminating symbols from the everyday culture is that we are erasing our history. This was used as monuments were taken down in many places in the south because they were of Confederate leaders. Funny thing was many were put up during the Civil Rights Era to intimidate blacks seeking to be seen as equal. History was never the intent. But I would argue we could eliminate every sign of the Confederacy in public life and we would still know about it if we study our history. Growing up if someone turned on you, you called them a Benedict Arnold. He was as much a standard for traitor as Judas from the Christian Bible. Benedict Arnold was a Major General who fought with valor and was injured at the Battle of Saratoga for Continental Army. There is a monument to his fighting there, but it is a boot and bears no name. When he promised the British West Point he gave up the right to have his heroics lauded in our country. While some wanted to honored his skills and cunning they did it without name. Yet even today we know who he was. We don't need symbols in public places to know our history. We have the stories.
The argument here is also one of the 1st amendment as the statues and all symbols are a form of speech. That is true they are, but the government is not outlawing the statues, nor the symbols. In the case of state flags that have tried to eliminate imagery that is seen as hurtful or taking down of statues, the government is simply not endorsing those things. If in any city you wanted to put up a statue of Robert E. Lee or Adolph Hitler or Carrot top on your private land, and the government tries to stop you, I will fight for your right to do it. (just don't make me defend Carrot Top).
In recent weeks however the attacks on symbols has been really called into question. When Nike wanted to put out a shoe with the Betsy Ross flag on it. A flag with a blue field with a circle of 13 stars and 13 stripes alternating red and white Colin Kapernick, a spokesperson for the brand, objected. He called it a symbol of racism. It has been adopted by some some racist organization and it is similar to the 1st Confederate flag I mentioned earlier. Nike withdrew the shoe and of course the conservatives lost their minds. At first I sided with Nike, if that symbol truly does generate some concern that it would become white nationalist attire I get that others would feel uncomfortable promoting, especially with a company that has banked on a large African-American following for brand loyalty. But as I think more, there could have been a middle ground. But worse is the actor Chris Pratt. I will start by saying I know little about Chris Pratt, he has made conservative comments. Recently he wore a t-shirt of an American flag with the Gadsden Flag symbol of a snake and the words Don't Tread On Me. A flag from the Revolutionary War and I have to tell you one of my favorites as a kid, it has recently been used by far right hate groups, Two white supremacists used the flag to drape the bodies of two police officers they killed in Las Vegas recently. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission says the flag may, in some circumstances, be racial offensive in the workplace. But there is no indication the Pratt is a aligned with the thinking of white nationalists. But just wearing the shirt bring some serious criticism.
Symbols tell us things about the person or organization sharing it. But rarely do we get the whole story from a quick glance. As a culture we have always made decisions about what is publicly appropriate and what is not. While our 1st amendment protects us from government telling us what symbols we can use or promote, the community we live in tells us what is acceptable. The local businessman who decorates his store with swastikas will likely never get the Chamber of Commerce award in most American cities, but if we outlawed is decorations we are going in the wrong direction.
Sometimes the outrage about a symbol is seen as what it is, a fringe cause. Currently there is a story of a woman calling a Spiderman art installation a symbol of the Devil. Should the art piece be removed for one person's misunderstanding? It is worth however taking into account the audience who has to see the symbols we do have around us. A swastika in a classroom can heighten anxiety in a student whose family story involved many people killed by the Nazis. A Confederate flag still gives many African-Americans a visceral reaction. There are many other ways that symbols can make people uncomfortable and it is just human and sometimes good business to acknowledge that. (Nike stock rose after the flag controversy). Public sentiment will always shape what is acceptable expression in symbols, words and deeds. Sometimes for good and sometimes for nonsense. But as long as it is public sentiment that is driving the discussion we are comfortable, but if the government starts to decide we are in danger.
No comments:
Post a Comment