Hemming Park Beautification

[jlmann]

was just down there as I am 3-4 times/week.

the laura street half of the park is soooo much more pleasant and, for better or worse, your average office worker might actually feel comfortable down there.

you can hear the fountain instead of drug-addled arguing, one can appreciate the library façade, no sudden head jerk when you end up downwind of a vagrant.

it's a huge improvement and that space can be reactivated in a matter of days when the need arises

no sign of anyone in the church shadows as folks seem to be learning they need to find one of the other countless public spaces in the city to do nothing at

[jlmann]

confederates are americans too lol.  oh alderman paaarrrrkkk..............

[lastdaysoffla]

The city acquired Hemming Park in 1866 and named it after Jacksonville Confederate veteran Charles C. Hemming, who gifted the Confederate statue standing in the middle of the park. The statue is one of the few pieces of Jacksonville that survived the Great Fire of 1901.

#TakeEmDownJax

Might the City remove the soldier monument and possibly change the name of the park as well?

My my, how the times they are a changing....

I hope not. I'm no Son of the Confederacy or anything but I think it is silly to remove monuments, names, etc. from the public that have to do with the Confederacy. Confederates were Americans too and should have monuments.

Those who forget history...

Uh....I'm pretty sure they were fighting for 4 years specifically to no longer be part of the USA.  We are literally celebrating people who fought against us to become something else.  And I can assure that the removal of a Confederate statue will have no effect on the populace remembering or forgetting that time in history when our southern states wanted to be their own country so they could continue slavery (among other reasons).

Yes the CSA was fighting to secede but the Union was fighting to reintegrate those lands and people back into the Union. Were civilians and soilders of the CSA not American citizens upon conclusion of the War? Were they exiled or deported? Were they not born American citizens? Should their deaths not be remembered? Should these people be ignored because they fought on the wrong side of conflict among Americans?

The Civil War made the United States and the good and bad of it should not be erased from history. I don't believe we should whitewash the historical record to cater to the sensitivities of the current generation.

As far as people forgetting. I wouldn't be so sure. We have young people all over the country using symbols and rhetoric of the Nazis. Hitler is now a meme used by young and old of the far right in this country. Have they forgotten that our fathers and grandfathers fought a war against this ideology? Maybe not, but a great many of them have forgotten why we fought WWII.

Examples:

Flag of "Kekistan"

[Jim]

I hope not. I'm no Son of the Confederacy or anything but I think it is silly to remove monuments, names, etc. from the public that have to do with the Confederacy. Confederates were Americans too and should have monuments.

Those who forget history...

Uh....I'm pretty sure they were fighting for 4 years specifically to no longer be part of the USA.  We are literally celebrating people who fought against us to become something else.  And I can assure that the removal of a Confederate statue will have no effect on the populace remembering or forgetting that time in history when our southern states wanted to be their own country so they could continue slavery (among other reasons).

Yes the CSA was fighting to secede but the Union was fighting to reintegrate those lands and people back into the Union. Were civilians and soilders of the CSA not American citizens upon conclusion of the War? Were they exiled or deported? Were they not born American citizens? Should their deaths not be remembered? Should these people be ignored because they fought on the wrong side of conflict among Americans?

The Civil War made the United States and the good and bad of it should not be erased from history. I don't believe we should whitewash the historical record to cater to the sensitivities of the current generation.

As far as people forgetting. I wouldn't be so sure. We have young people all over the country using symbols and rhetoric of the Nazis. Hitler is now a meme used by young and old of the far right in this country. Have they forgotten that our fathers and grandfathers fought a war against this ideology? Maybe not, but a great many of them have forgotten why we fought WWII.

Remember them, yes.  Celebrate them, no.  That is what museums, historical preservation, books, history class, etc....are for.  Raising monuments to celebrate those that went to war so they could continue to own people is an appalling and shameful way to remember those that were owned.

Why romanticize an evil? I'd far rather raise a statue to celebrate and remember the cotton picker that thanklessly helped build this country than the man who applied whip to back.

And since you invoked Godwin's Law, you might want to see how the Germans have handled their own checkered history.  You certainly do not see statues of Hitler, Himmler, Geobbels or Goring in their town plazas and parks but they don't shy away from the atrocities either with museums and preservations.

[lastdaysoffla]

Those who forget history...

I respect that some confederate soldiers were just doing there duty and all.  But call the confederacy what it is: a renegade insurgency.

so we're bound to secede again if we take down monuments?  that's a stretch at best

I wasn't implying secession as a result of taking down monuments but simply that erasing and re-writing history is a mistake. Are going to pretend that slavery never happened? Should we start calling slaves 'workers'?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/10/05/immigrant-workers-or-slaves-textbook-maker-backtracks-after-mothers-online-complaint/?utm_term=.0c6a797b5544

There is an attempt on both sides of the political spectrum to alter history. From the right, to soften the atrocities of the past; i.e. "Hitler wasn't so bad" or "Blacks were better off under slavery" and from the left to pad the world with safe spaces so that nothing contradictory to their world view is put within their line of sight, "this building can't be named after Woodrow Wilson" ( https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/nov/23/princeton-woodrow-wilson-racism-students-remove-name ) or "this statues offends me". Are we going to tear down Arlington House and move Arlington National Cemetery because Robert E. Lee once lived there?

My point being is that these monuments are just that, monuments to the past. A past that has happened and must not be ignored.
The absence or removal of these monuments signify an indifference to history similar to the indifference to science we see happening. A statue in a park in Jacksonville or in the center of a major roundabout in New Orleans might cause a child to look up and say "who's that and why is there a statue of him?" therefore sparking a interest in history. A terrible thing to lose.

[lastdaysoffla]

I hope not. I'm no Son of the Confederacy or anything but I think it is silly to remove monuments, names, etc. from the public that have to do with the Confederacy. Confederates were Americans too and should have monuments.

Those who forget history...

Uh....I'm pretty sure they were fighting for 4 years specifically to no longer be part of the USA.  We are literally celebrating people who fought against us to become something else.  And I can assure that the removal of a Confederate statue will have no effect on the populace remembering or forgetting that time in history when our southern states wanted to be their own country so they could continue slavery (among other reasons).

Yes the CSA was fighting to secede but the Union was fighting to reintegrate those lands and people back into the Union. Were civilians and soilders of the CSA not American citizens upon conclusion of the War? Were they exiled or deported? Were they not born American citizens? Should their deaths not be remembered? Should these people be ignored because they fought on the wrong side of conflict among Americans?

The Civil War made the United States and the good and bad of it should not be erased from history. I don't believe we should whitewash the historical record to cater to the sensitivities of the current generation.

As far as people forgetting. I wouldn't be so sure. We have young people all over the country using symbols and rhetoric of the Nazis. Hitler is now a meme used by young and old of the far right in this country. Have they forgotten that our fathers and grandfathers fought a war against this ideology? Maybe not, but a great many of them have forgotten why we fought WWII.

Remember them, yes.  Celebrate them, no.  That is what museums, historical preservation, books, history class, etc....are for.  Raising monuments to celebrate those that went to war so they could continue to own people is an appalling and shameful way to remember those that were owned.

Why romanticize an evil? I'd far rather raise a statue to celebrate and remember the cotton picker that thanklessly helped build this country than the man who applied whip to back.

And since you invoked Godwin's Law, you might want to see how the Germans have handled their own checkered history.  You certainly do not see statues of Hitler, Himmler, Geobbels or Goring in their town plazas and parks but they don't shy away from the atrocities either with museums and preservations.

I don't see a monument as a celebration. These monuments can be seen as a celebration to those who believe in the cause of the Confederacy. I think monuments such as these should be looked upon by the masses as a solemn reminder of the grievances of the so we do not forget. So we can be reminded of the lengths that twisted men with twisted ideologies will go to.

But I can see why you would think these statues are celebrations. Literally placing figures like Lee on a pedestal. But here we are again at the start. Should these be erased from the historical landscape? Like it or not these cities were part of the CSA and that is an important part of their history.

as far as Germany, I think what they've done is in proportion to the atrocities that were committed in their name. That being said, would you favor laws like they have in Germany where use of symbols relating to the CSA were banned by law? That free speech be limited in cases of people spouting Confederate ideas? Where the images that I used in that post above be illegal?

[jlmann]

Should these people be ignored because they fought on the wrong side of conflict among Americans?

wrong question.

Should these people be memorialized and implicitly celebrated through monuments because they fought on the wrong side of conflict among Americans?

a better questions and one to which the obvious answer is no.

[jlmann]

a monument is an implicit endorsement or celebration, despite your opinion

now slap a plaque on that says "Pray to our God that NEVER AGAIN shall we endorse slavery or institutions akin to it.  That NEVER AGAIN shall we raise up arms against our countrymen.  May we not repeat the mistakes of Mr Hemming and his associates."

then you might have a case that it is ok to stand as a lesson.  to my knowledge no such caveat exists on that monument or any others.

[Jim]

I don't see a monument as a celebration. These monuments can be seen as a celebration to those who believe in the cause of the Confederacy. I think monuments such as these should be looked upon by the masses as a solemn reminder of the grievances of the so we do not forget. So we can be reminded of the lengths that twisted men with twisted ideologies will go to.

But I can see why you would think these statues are celebrations. Literally placing figures like Lee on a pedestal. But here we are again at the start. Should these be erased from the historical landscape? Like it or not these cities were part of the CSA and that is an important part of their history.

Ask yourself why those statues were raised and who raised them.   They most certainly were not put up with the intention that children will see them as reminders of an atrocity to never be committed again.  They were raised to give tribute to those they perceived as heroes. To help establish an ideology as continuing regardless of national status.

[jlmann]

also ask yourself re: neo Nazis if keeping memorials of Hitler up wouldve be a good idea.

by your twisted logic re:hemming they should have and should still stand

[lastdaysoffla]

a monument is an implicit endorsement or celebration, despite your opinion

now slap a plaque on that says "Pray to our God that NEVER AGAIN shall we endorse slavery or institutions akin to it.  That NEVER AGAIN shall we raise up arms against our countrymen.  May we not repeat the mistakes of Mr Hemming and his associates."

then you might have a case that it is ok to stand as a lesson.  to my knowledge no such caveat exists on that monument or any others.

That implication is an objective fact?  Sounds like an opinion.

Monument - a statue, building, or other structure erected to commemorate a famous or notable person or event.

                  a statue or other structure placed by or over a grave in memory of the dead.

                  a building, structure, or site that is of historical importance or interest.

I see nothing about endorsement or celebration.

Ask yourself why those statues were raised and who raised them.   They most certainly were not put up with the intention that children will see them as reminders of an atrocity to never be committed again.  They were raised to give tribute to those they perceived as heroes. To help establish an ideology as continuing regardless of national status.

The date of when the monument was erected must be taken into context as well. The Lee monument in the New Orleans for example was created in the 1880's. So one could say that most likely the people that created that monument were celebrating Lee and the CSA. Although, time, people and culture changes. The context of the 1880's no longer exists. The CSA is no longer broadly seen as something to be celebrated, so the meaning of the monuments change.

The social meanings of monuments are rarely fixed and certain and are frequently 'contested' by different social groups. As an example: whilst the former East German socialist state may have seen the Berlin Wall as a means of 'protection' from the ideological impurity of the west, dissidents and others would often argue that it was symbolic of the inherent repression and paranoia of that state. This contention of meaning is a central theme of modern 'post processual' archaeological discourse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monument#Protection_and_preservation

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I guess if they can forgive us, why can't we forgive ourselves?



George Washington
American tourists are often surprised that there is a statue of their first president in the heart of London at Trafalgar Square. The statue shows Washington holding a bundle of 13 fasces which represent the original 13 states of the newly created United States of America. There is a popular legend that Washington, whose family came from the North East of England, had said he would never set foot on British soil again so some American soil was put under the statue comply with his wishes. It is a replica of an original by Jean Antoine Houdon and was given to Britain by the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1924.

https://www.guidelondon.org.uk/blog/around-london/statues-6-american-presidents-london/

*Edit:  Bolded text highlights even the snarkiness that was delivered with said statue.

[jlmann]

nope.  not an opinion.  just fact.  your suggestion that we must ignore the rationale for why something is built in the first place is well, your not supposed to call names here, but that sure isn't an intelligent position

I'm white, but my god.  How thick do you have to be to not understand that a black person might be rightly offended by monuments to the soldiers who waged war to keep their ancestors as property, to be treated as such?  that they might be offended by the way the remnants of the confederacy abused their great/grandparents for decades?  That those slave owners grandchildren fought bitterly against anything protecting their right to vote, to be treated as an equal human?  The same people whose police force brutalized them with water cannons and batons and still does to this day?

The answer to all those questions is that you have to be remarkably thick to not see that.

We don't have to be tolerant of intolerance.

if one is under 50, i'd be willing to bet within your lifetimes you'll be very hard pressed to find such a monument. 

And all those here advocating for the monuments will be remembered alongside those who wanted to keep colored out of their restaurants.

as you should be

[thelakelander]

was just down there as I am 3-4 times/week.

the laura street half of the park is soooo much more pleasant and, for better or worse, your average office worker might actually feel comfortable down there.

you can hear the fountain instead of drug-addled arguing, one can appreciate the library façade, no sudden head jerk when you end up downwind of a vagrant.

it's a huge improvement and that space can be reactivated in a matter of days when the need arises

no sign of anyone in the church shadows as folks seem to be learning they need to find one of the other countless public spaces in the city to do nothing at

I walk through Hemming at least twice a day during the week, since it's between my office and where I park my truck. The poor people never bothered me (maybe because of my background) but there's no one in that particular area now, so I guess the goal has been achieved. I'm not sure Hemming will ever be vibrant because we still don't understand the importance of the "outer square" on a public space like that, but the revamped area already filling up of random blades of grass and weeds. Hopefully COJ/Friends of Hemming will do a better job of maintaining it.  Btw, the church groups still come out.  There was a line getting free meals on that exact same sidewalk the other weekend.

[lastdaysoffla]

nope.  not an opinion.  just fact.  your suggestion that we must ignore the rationale for why something is built in the first place is well, your not supposed to call names here, but that sure isn't an intelligent position

Actually in my above post in response to you I did say that the context of when the monument was erected must be taken into account.

I'm white, but my god.  How thick do you have to be to not understand that a black person might be rightly offended by monuments to the soldiers who waged war to keep their ancestors as property, to be treated as such?  that they might be offended by the way the remnants of the confederacy abused their great/grandparents for decades?  That those slave owners grandchildren fought bitterly against anything protecting their right to vote, to be treated as an equal human?  The same people whose police force brutalized them with water cannons and batons and still does to this day?

I fully understand that an African-American would be sensitive to anything to do with the CSA or Slavery. I would assume though that slavery is something that dealt with by each individual as a possibility in their ancestry. I have sympathy for those who are affected by these monuments and symbols but it is not our job in a free society to protect those whom might be offended. This is history, this is fact, it isn't going away because some one is offended or because it is grim to face. Should be demolish the slave cabin's at Kingsley Plantation? Should we knock down the White House because it was built by slaves and occupied by slave holders?

I can't even address the blanket statements that all white people opposed to Civil Rights in the first half of the 20th century are descendants of slaveholders.

The answer to all those questions is that you have to be remarkably thick to not see that.

We don't have to be tolerant of intolerance.

In the sense of Free Speech, Freedom of Expression and under the Rule of Law, actually we do.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

if one is under 50, i'd be willing to bet within your lifetimes you'll be very hard pressed to find such a monument. 

And all those here advocating for the monuments will be remembered alongside those who wanted to keep colored out of their restaurants.

as you should be

I should be remembered alongside bigots and slaveholders for my belief that history should remain intact and in public view despite the ugliness of the truth? Fine.