Doesn’t seem to fit in any existing thread -
The plaque was dedicated in 1965 when, in theory, we were maybe starting to move beyond obvious racism?
This is mentioned in the thread on Confederate statues being taken down.
Which is here, and I think that we can move the discussion (if any) there.
From the article.
The panels were dedicated in 1965 and created by artist Laura Gardin Fraser, who “wanted to create art that depicted ‘historical incidents or persons’ that symbolized the principal events of that time, thereby documenting both tragedy and triumph in our nation’s history,” according to West Point’s statement.
A U.S. Military Academy guide to Fraser’s work, which was cited in the statement, said "it should be noted that where historic personages are shown it is not intended as a memorialization of these individuals but rather as representative figures of their times."
I don’t think the country should be trying to erase history.
Take down monuments that honor traitors but don’t deny the existence of those traitors.
And my response here is the same. Put it in a museum, a place specifically for representing history. Placing something historical at the entrance of a building has traditionally been a place of honor. That’s what these sorts of plaques are: they honor the history of something.
Removing said plaques does not remove the history of the building. The only history being preserved is the history of the plaque. Hence why I say the plaque can be moved. As long as the museum notes where the plaque was found, its history is intact. And as long no one tries to pretend that the KKK didn’t exist or rewrite what they did, their history is intact.
Sure, the opposite is not always true. Those who wish to destroy history will often try to destroy the reminders of that history. But they also have to try and remove those ideas from the history books. And, in fact, if you change the history books, the object itself can remain, and the history still be destroyed. That’s what the slavery deniers love to do.
Looking at the panel it does appear to be honoring the KKK, or at least placing the KKK in a position of significant individuals or organizations without any context. The artist may have had good intentions, but the execution is extremely lacking. I don’t think the panel gives the impression of simply acknowledges the existence of the KKK, and as such, it’s problematic.
Here’s a link to the guide printed by the military that thoroughly explains the background, intent and meaning of every figure on the panels. (pdf)
The artist Laura Gardin Fraser died in 1966 (per Wikipedia), so this was presumably one of her last works. The article notes she did a full-size double sculpture of Lee and Stonewall Jackson in 1936. Not necessarily indicative of her beliefs (different times and you’ve got to make a living), but including the KKK on the plaque and (presumably) no other organizations (it looks like mostly named people otherwise?) is an odd artistic choice.
The role of the KKK,as bad as it was (and is), is quite significant in the fight for equal rights.
Fair enough, the quote in the explanation reads:
Ku Klux Klan - an organization of white people who hid their criminal activity behind a mask and sheet
And there are a few other negative entries represented, such as the Dred Scott decision and the Salem Witch trials.
Thanks for the link to the explanation, and I withdraw my implied criticism of Ms Fraser’s motives.
The initial story about this “KKK plaque” in the New York Times left out a lot of context, making it sound like West Point had a plaque dedicated to, and celebrating, the KKK. The story has since been updated.
Here’s a really good pic of the panel. Cadet Dolan is unfortunately standing in front of the KKK portion, but you can see it here. The piece is definitely not pro-KKK. The vast majority of the figures depicted were abolitionists or Union military, including Abe Lincoln, John Brown, William Lloyd Garrison, Julia Ward Howe (author of Battle Hymn of the Republic, and sister to Harriet Beacher Stowe, who wrote Uncle Tom’s Cabin, which is also on the panel), Dred Scott (the person, not the legal decision), Clara Barton, John C Fremont, and Susan B. Anthony. Aside from the KKK , the only pro-slavery or pro-confederate figures are Davy Crockett, who was a slave owner, and three Confederate generals facing off with three Union generals, with a subtext of the former surrendering to the latter. Plus a “Carpet Bagger,” which isn’t exactly pro-Confederate, but represents ex-Confederate complaints about post-war treatment.
Conclusion: not a racist art installation, pretty clearly a pro-Union, anti-slavery piece that included the KKK as historically important during the era the piece depicts.
I remember her.
I think I get another punch for my “Woke Leftist” card for jumping to the conclusion of racism before all the facts are known (in my defense, ‘if it could be racist, it probably is racist’ for things that are around my age old is not a bad default).