Memorial’s message elevates controversy
December 14, 2009
http://www.newsobserver.com/entertainment/arts/story/213404.html
There has been great controversy surrounding two statues standing in the upper quad, also known as McCorkle Place, on UNC Chapel Hill’s campus. One of these statues is a 20-foot-tall depiction of a confederate soldier, known as Silent Sam, erected as a monument to the Civil War. The other, about a hundred yards away, is known as the “Unsung Founders Memorial” and is a polished table held-up by 300 black figures in honor of the African-Americas, slave and free, who built this campus.
As with much art, the meaning of these two statues has been interpreted differently according to the viewer. Some view Silent Sam as an offensive reminder of an overtly racist period within our country’s history. Others view the statue as a non-offensive record of a time period that cannot be erased. In regards to the Unsung Founders Memorial, some see the table to be depicting blacks as small and inferior and enslaved, while others see them as mighty and “Herculean” and seemingly holding the weight of the world. Whether or not these pieces are celebrating, commemorating, or documenting, they are controversial.
Much of this controversy revolves around the proximity of the statues to one another and the juxtaposition this creates and the selection of artists commissioned to create these works. The Unsung Founders Monument, which was a gift from students to the university, is the work of a Korean artist who was chosen out of 70 original prospective artists, 11 of which were black. Two of the four students on the selection committee were black and in the final selection process one of three artists who came to Chapel Hill for interviews was black. It seems to me that this particular statue was built upon diverse decisions, but this is not the case, in my opinion, with Silent Sam who was created by artist John Wilson who was commissioned by the United Daughters of Confederacy.
I think that every person has the right to interpret these pieces however they would like, but that we should respond to this controversy in light of those who have been offended. It is easy to get caught up in one’s own perspective and become blind to another. Just because an individual is not offended by something does not mean that it is not offensive. I think that the university should consider the validity of the offense in the eyes of the offended and act in the way that they would like to be treated.
