A controversy has been brewing in a city nearby to me here in New Jersey. There is a sculpture in Jersey City, right across the Hudson from Manhattan, that has stood for a quarter of a century, but which is currently mired in controversy. The mayor of Jersey City, Steven Michael Fulop, recently criticized the Katyń Memorial Statue in his city, suggesting that it was grotesque and did not belong. He wanted to temporarily take it down, and relocate it.
Apparently, he was not expecting the level of opposition, not to mention publicity, that his decision has generated. It has been a serious firestorm of controversy, perhaps aided by the recent controversies regarding taking down and removing statues of historical figures that represented a darker, more sinister aspect of the past that many feel are not worthy of honoring. That includes several Confederate figures down south, and Christopher Columbus closer to home here, in New York City.
The Katyń Memorial Statue, however, does not depict any such things, although it certainly is meant to remind people of an ugly aspect of history, nevertheless. It is a memorial to the over 20,000 Polish troops who were executed by the Soviets, under the order of Josef Stalin, shorty after Stalin invaded the Soviet Union invaded eastern Poland, following Germany's takeover of western Poland months earlier, which started World War II. Germany had waited for the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact that essentially encouraged Hitler to go ahead and invade Poland, without worrying about Soviet interference. The two nations effectively divided up Poland.
Many Poles were slaughtered by the Soviets, while many more were sent to Siberia, and the Katyń Memorial Statue is an effort to remember that grim history. Thus, it is viewed as extremely important by many, who do not want this history to be forgotten. Here are some thoughts by Slawek Platta, who is one of the lawyers representing the memorial in opposition to the mayor's plan to remove it, regarding this controversy:
Many Poles were slaughtered by the Soviets, while many more were sent to Siberia, and the Katyń Memorial Statue is an effort to remember that grim history. Thus, it is viewed as extremely important by many, who do not want this history to be forgotten. Here are some thoughts by Slawek Platta, who is one of the lawyers representing the memorial in opposition to the mayor's plan to remove it, regarding this controversy:
We also interviewed Slawek Platta, of the New York-based Platta Law firm, who is representing plaintiffs to place a temporary injunction against the removal of the Katyn Monument.
“I’m a Polish community leader and also a candidate to the State Senate in New York, and this action is not only by lawyers, but is a Polish community action. This unites Polish people in the United States, Poland and everywhere else in the world,” he explained.
“Everyone knows that Katyn [is the result of] 22,000 dead soldiers that were executed by the Soviets. No one will ever forget this, said Platta.
Now, I am not one to necessarily criticize the removal of statues and/or monuments from public places. Frankly, I think it was ridiculous that there were so many statues of prominent Confederate figures throughout the South, when what they were fighting for was, let's face it, preserving slavery. Also, many of those statues and monuments were erected right around the time that legalized Jim Crow segregation was being seriously threatened in the South, which not surprisingly, is when the Confederate battle flag began to gain tremendous popularity and started to be a symbol of resistance to this kind of change.
Also, I am not opposed to the statue of Columbus being removed in New York City because, frankly, Columbus was no hero. Whether people are honest about it or not, among the first impressions that Columbus had of the New World was that the natives would make good slaves, and this was documented in his own journal, thus making it undeniable. Considering the slaughter that was to come, and which Columbus had a role in, perhaps making him out to be this great big hero that we should all unquestioningly honor is not the way to go. So, yeah, let's take down the statue, as far as I am concerned.
On a more lighthearted note, I also was not a fan of another memorial or statue or artwork (not sure exactly how it should be classified, frankly) that actually was removed. That was the "Dialogue avec l'histoire" (Dialogue with history) by artist Jean-Pierre Raynaud, which was situated in that Québec City's Place de Paris. The thing with that was that the Place de Paris was right in the heart of Québec's old city, with centuries old stone homes and cobbled streets lending it a decidedly Old World charm that makes it unique among North American cities. Yet this monument looked ultramodern and, frankly, clashed with it's surroundings. It did not represent racism or slavery or genocide, but it was was not a good fit with that particular historical area of one of the most beautiful and charming cities in North America. I did not want the thing destroyed, but just removed and if possible, put somewhere more fitting. Perhaps the Plains of Abraham, or over by the grounds of the Parliament Building, or maybe even somewhere else entirely, to try and build up some other places of tourism for that city. However, the "Dialogue avec l'histoire" piece actually was destroyed in 2015, by order of city officials.
The Katyń Monument Statue is admittedly grim. Designed by artist Andrzej Pitynski, it shows a Polish man bound and gagged, and then stabbed in the back by a bayonet. Clearly, it is not a happy statue, but then again, it is not meant to be. What it has in common with the statues and memorials to Confederate figures and Christopher Columbus is that it is a stark reminder of a very dark chapter in history. However, unlike those, it does not honor the perpetrators. Josef Stalin, or the Soviet troops that instigated this horrific chapter, are not being honored. In fact, quite the opposite, which makes it an important statue, as far as I am concerned. It helps people remember a chapter in history that, I think it is far to say, no one wants repeated.
That is why I feel that the mayor of Jersey City should not have the power to remove the statue, just because he finds it distasteful. There is no question that this is a very sober statue, but that is what it is meant to be by design, which makes it very different from Columbus or Confederate memorials. It serves as a reminder and a tribute to the victims, and there is also a tribute to the victims of September 11th on the memorial, as well (remember, the statue overlooks the Hudson River and Manhattan beyond, specifically right where the attacks on the Twin Towers took place.
It should not be left to one man to decide the fate of something that has been around for decades now. It was not a problem until he made it a problem, and he should not have all the power to do whatever the hell he wants with it, either.
Should Jersey City's Katyn monument be moved? Updated May 7; Posted May 7
Federal lawsuit filed to keep Jersey City’s Katyn monument at Exchange Place By Marc Bussanich - May 8, 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment