Harry Shannon
You probably read about the statue of Edward Colston in Bristol. Amid the protests over the police killing of George Floyd, it was pulled off its pedestal, rolled to the harbour, and pushed into the water.
I grew up in England, but I had never heard of Colston. Yet his name “permeates the city [Bristol] on buildings and landmarks.” It turns out he was a slave trader and a philanthropist. Hmm, slave trader and philanthropist. What a combination! (But hardly a unique type – just read Anand Giridharadas’ book Winners take All.)
Of course this is not the first time that there have been calls for statues of historical figures to be removed (or buildings to be renamed, etc). Just search online for ‘statue debates.’ Canada has had its debates about Sir John A Macdonald, the country’s first Prime Minister, over the way he treated indigenous peoples.
In the U.S., there are ongoing arguments about the legacy of Robert E. Lee and other confederate symbols. Right now, some councillors in Oxford, England, want the statue of Cecil Rhodes removed. Rhodes was a British imperialist who ruled part of Southern Africa in the late 19th century.
The basic argument for removal, of course, is that we should not honour people whose conduct was disgraceful. And the case for leaving the statues in place is that we should not judge people from long ago by today’s standards and instead we should learn from the past.
I won’t get into the debate. But I have a proposal: a museum, where we can keep the history while not glorifying the bad guys. It would take in the controversial statues from our streets, and describe what the people depicted actually did. As well, there are plenty of portrait paintings or photographs that would belong; many are already in art galleries.
What to call it? Rogues’ gallery? Too much of a cliché. Museum of Bad People isn’t strong enough, and you wouldn’t want it confused with the Museum of Bad Art. Evildoers? Reminds me too much of George W Bush. Deplorables? Hillary Clinton used that one up. Museum of Despicable People? Perhaps. Sleazeballs and Scumbags? Yes, but is it too informal? Sociopaths and Psychopaths? That describes the prospective subjects well.
Regardless of the name, there’s the question of funding. It’s an obvious case for a modern-day Edward Colston, but who’s going to fund a museum like this that they might end up in? Is there a very wealthy person so confident they made their money ethically that they’re willing to provide the donation? Or does the money have to come from somewhere else?
Now the title of this article referred to ‘a Museum (or Museums).’ I included the plural because, alas, most countries could easily fill their own museum. (They could also fill them many times over with good people – Museums of Heroes.)
The Canadian Museum should be curated by representatives from Indigenous, Black, and other minority groups. It would certainly teach us some history we need to know.