Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

[FrogHunter]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

"Additionally, the consultants recommended the consideration of a possible renaming of the museum, which might accompany the relocation. The Museum’s Board of Trustees will carefully weigh any decision that is made regarding the renaming of the museum. No decision on whether or not to change the name has been made at this time, and possible new names for the Museum have not been chosen. Any decision that is made will be in concert with and dependant on the new location. " blah, blah, blah.......

I have already seen enough of these ad nauseum canned responses from bigoted college presidents and politicians. They don't care whether or not we sell out our Confederate heritage and deny history. They just want us to get tired and go away so they can get on with their grave robbing.

Not anytime, Not anywhere.

[dusty27]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

What kills me about this topic is it is going in some many directions. Dave and Greg have been discussing this topic using facts and examples from similar experiences, while others have chimed in with personal feelings and over generalizations about the 'grand conspiracy" of doing away with everything Confederate. These things wouldn't be happening if the MAJORITY didn't want it to happen. Isn't that what a democracy is?

It comes down to money. Those who have it can spend it any way they want to. Those who need it need to do things to get it. Like it has been said, it is the artifacts and the stories they can tell that have to be preserved. Who cares what they name the building it is displayed in as long as the building is secure and environmentally controlled?

[FrogHunter]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

Dusty,

I agree with all your facts and apologize for tossing museum bureaucrats in the pile with the other ones just on the basis of my "similar experiences" such as the threat to Memorial Hall Confederate Museum in New Orleans.

Perhaps this museum will be given a more marketable name like 'Civil War Things'. However, I disagree with your endorsement of the MAJORITY opinion because I believe there is something sacred in the actions and intentions of the former Confederates who inspired and built the Museum of the Confederacy. I have adopted the following MINORITY opinion:

"Any society which suppressses the heritage of its conquered minorities, prevents their history, and denies them their symbols, has sewn the seed of its own destruction." William Wallace 1281 AD

[Pvt_Jack_Bauer]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

I feel that Mimi Elrod needs to look at the whole picture and not pick and choose what she sees in American History. To say that the Confederacy only stood for racism and slavery is obserd and to base changing the name of a museum that has stood since 1896 is insane. Now on the subject of changing the name of the building and not caring Dusty, I would have to disagree. I feel people take alot of pride in a name. Its human nature. Its just my thoughts and I hope that the museum stays within the city of Richmond.

[SCTiger]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

Dusty, it's not a conspiracy, it's really happening. Remember the Confederate Air Force? Although it's not a WBTS organization, they sold out and went with the generic Commemorative Air Force. After that hog wash, my support for them dropped to nothing. I truly could care less what they do now, I had contributed money to that group for years and I felt insulted by the name change. Names do mean something, so do symbols, uniforms, flags, etc.

I guess they will rename it "The Commemorative Museum of a Hidden History of a low-key war that happened in 1861 and Slavery exhibit. Sponsored by a grant from the Omnicorp."

[Pvt_Jack_Bauer]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

I guess they will rename it "The Commemorative Museum of a Hidden History of a low-key war that happened in 1861 and Slavery exhibit. Sponsored by a grant from the Omnicorp."

So funny but yet so scary because for some reason I could see a variation of that name being hoisted above the museum.

[Moose]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

I believe that most of you are missing Mr. Eggleston's point. Throw all conspiracy and PC theories away. They have nothing to do with this. The study done by the independent museum historians is the MoC’s scapegoat. The reason why this museum is falling to the ground, is because it is being driven in that direction...by its board of directors and president. The name of the museum has got nothing to do with it, when you are talking about a board that outright refused to take donations from a donor. This is the needy turning away charity folks, not the other way around. The MoC board of directors is using VCU, and the word “Confederate” as a reason for its short comings. The MoC can move to Lexington, it can move anywhere, but if you do not change who is running it, the museum will fail no matter where it goes. As a VCU student I can tell you, no one in Richmond cares about the word “Confederate.” The statues do not get vandalized, the annual SCV Hollywood Cemetery Commemoration does not get picketed. The problem lies solely in the hands of those who run it.


Cheers,
Joseph Caridi

[M.Latham]

Museum of the Confederacy, no more.

The Museum of the Confederacy will likely drop the word "Confederacy" from its name when it moves its collection to a new home.


Full story...

http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1149193287672

Mark Latham

[ley74]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

As a supporter of the Museum of the Confederacy, it is actually refreshing that the Board of Trustees appears to be listening to the peer review committee. The peer review committee was no bunch of slouches and their recommendations were a consensus of ideas to move a group from absolutely no strategic plan, to a course of action to save the collection.

An example: Several years ago, the MoC was denied renewal of their certification by the American Association of Museums. The sole reason was the lack of a strategic plan. The AAM requirements are fundamental

http://www.aam-us.org/aboutmuseums/standards/stbp.cfm

If the current direction by the Board of Trustees is prompted by sound strategic planning then, it is at least a start.

What confound me are the periodic, almost frantic press releases from the CEO of the Museum, to draw attention to its plight. Instead of quietly investigating alternatives, determining the most reasonable course of action, then releasing the plan, Mr. Rawles seems intent of hyping every move. Quite frankly, it is embarrassing.

The world I live in is subject to making very significant decisions with the highest degree of confidentiality. Why make a circus out of such things?

[Wounded_Zouave]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

As a VCU student I can tell you, no one in Richmond cares about the word “Confederate.” The statues do not get vandalized, the annual SCV Hollywood Cemetery Commemoration does not get picketed.

Not so. The statue of Robert E. Lee on Monument Avenue was vandalized on January 17, 2004 when someone spray-painted "Death to Nazis" and "Happy Birthday, MLK" on the base. In January 200 the Richmond floodwall mural that included a depiction of Robert E. Lee was vandalized. See http://www.usa-civil-war.com/Opinions/lee.html



SCV events may not be picketted at Hollywood Cemetery, but lets take a broader look at the picture. There was a good deal of protesting when a monument to Abraham Lincoln was placed at the NPS Civil War Visitor Center at Tredegar Ironworks. It was the usual silly rhetoric:

Outside the park gates, about 40 people — some in period costume — waved Confederate battle flags and signs disparaging Lincoln, a man several said they consider to be no better than any of this century’s worst war criminals.

“Hitler/Paris 1940. Lincoln/Richmond 1865. Any questions?” one sign read. Another, held by a young boy, read: “Lincoln wasn’t worth a cent — then or now.” And a wanted poster with Lincoln’s face read: “WANTED: For War Crimes.”

Several hours before the afternoon dedication, about 100 members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and their families gathered at the nearby grave of Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederacy, to protest the Lincoln statue.

“As long as I’m commander in chief, we will never accept it,” vowed Ron Wilson, national commander of the group. “We are going to fight these people everywhere they raise their head.”

Those opposed to the statue said they consider its placement at a Confederate landmark a gratuitous measure of disrespect to people of Southern heritage.

Several also said they are skeptical of what they call the “Lincoln mythology” and his record of achievements, adding that to the terrified city residents at the time, Lincoln behaved as a conquering boor.

Supporters of the statue dismissed the opposition as a small group of divisive people, many of whom have also been at the center of other racially tinged debates over the appropriate civic symbols for the former Confederate capital.

“These people are largely not from Richmond,” Lt. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, a former mayor of Richmond, said of the opponents. “They feel they have a right to tell us in Richmond how to do our business. They are wrong. We claim Abraham Lincoln as a brother. We claim Abraham Lincoln as a Virginian.”

From Confederacy Backers Say They’ll Never Recognize Tribute
By Michael D. Shear and Peter Whoriskey
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, April 6, 2003; Page C06

So it would seem that Richmond isn't exactly a safe haven for monuments or museums be they either of the blue or gray persuasion.

[dave81276]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

Mr. Simmons,

I don't like to run down rabbit trails, but, on the whole, while there is a lot of political opposition to the Confederacy around town, there is very little vandalism of monuments in Richmond, even in the more secluded parts of the city. Richmond actually has a pretty bad grafitti problem; providentially, the grafittists seem to leave monuments, Civil War and otherwise, alone. The Lee mural was burned during a vicious statewide debate over the status of Lee-Jackson-King Day; it was an isolated occurrence during a period when racist tensions were exacerbated by politicians and the press. Furthermore, I don't see how the protest of a few SCV members at the dedication of the Lincoln Monument could possibly show Richmond to be hostile to the Museum of the Confederacy. On the whole, Mr. Caridi is right. The majority of people in Richmond who actually get worked up about the Confederacy are politicoes, white and black, who use veiled racist rhetoric to garner votes for their particular candidate or cause.

[Wounded_Zouave]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

Besides, I don't see how the protest of a few SCV members at the dedication of the Lincoln Monument could possibly show Richmond to be hostile to the Museum of the Confederacy.

I was just trying to make the point that Civil War history will generate controversy and protests of some type regardless of ideology and that Richmond isn't really unique in this regard.

[jpbab]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

It's a sad and unfortunate fact that the "stars and bars" thus "the Confederacy" has changed its meaning in the minds of most people (hopefully) outside of the Civil War era history buffs.

I personally have no trouble with its current name and wish it could remain as such. But I also understand why the idea is being bounced around. I would actually support a name change long before I supported a move from Richmond.

Perhaps suggesting a name paying homage to the original intent but also not offending those unaware the original meaning and its place in American history.

i.e Civil War Museum of the Southern States?????

[Moose]

Re: Museum of the Confederacy to drop "Confederacy" from title?

Mr. Simmons --
While I was living here in January of 2004 and a block away from the Lee statue, I saw no vandalism, but you seem to have found a picture, so that’s that. As far as the graffiti goes, Mr. Eggleston is right about a city wide problem. The other thing, it that VCU has over 30,000 students. Many of whom are left-wing, hippy, punk, art kids; bottom line: the WHITE Kids spray painted the monuments. Why? Because these punk kids thought that it would get under the skin of the SCV and old Richmond families (thus "Death to Nazis"). It has nothing to do with Civil War current day politics. Also one must take into account that many of these kids are not from Richmond, and won’t stay here when they graduate, so even if they were causing problems for “Confederate Heritage,” in a few years their votes will not matter. And in fact, where the Lee and Jackson monuments are, is a predominantly white college student area studded with churches and old early 1900s homes. Not likely that the graffiti was caused by racial tension between Richmond blacks and whites.

The only problem I have with a name change is the fact that the museum was started by the Daughters of the Confederacy. Preserving the museum as a Confederate museum is preserving an aspect of this war. It was started as "shrine" if you will to those Confederate soldiers. There was a reason why the founders chose Richmond, and chose the title of the museum. But once again, I do not believe moving out of Richmond (Lexington wants the MoC to change the name -- is Lexington safe for Confederate history?) or changing the name would help turn a museum around that is already failing.

Cheers,
Joseph Caridi

[Jubilo]

Good money after bad

Dear Fellers ,
The Museum of the Confederacy considering moving, a name change , the Chicago Historical Society changing its name and then closing the Civil War exhibit ( unbelievable in itself !), artifacts getting stolen , flags deteriorating , what next ?
The question now becomes how to cope with or oppose such actions . Those interested in Civil War History are too unorganized , politically un-influencial ,
and under-financed to attempt a protest or boycott . The exception was the late Brian Prohanka. What an example ! He left his money to battlefield preservation . Perhaps we should decline supporting museums et. al , and put our money in preserving the one thing not being made any more : land . The museums will continue to operate as they receive various government fundings but the battlefields once gone will probably be gone forever.
all for the old flag ,
David Corbett