Tag Archives: criteria

Suggestive Guidelines

1 Reply

Monuments have been created and put up to show the importance of an event, a person, or group of people. They provide a foundation for the social upbringing of today’s society. They’re set in place for remembrance of what our society was like years prior. Sometimes they go unnoticed because there are many ways of defining a monument. The most popular forms are plaques or statues. Due to recent controversy about particular Confederate monuments and whether they should stay or be taken down in Charlottesville, North Carolina, Mayor De Blasio is being asked to conduct a thorough examination of the monuments in New York City. He has plans to come up with a criteria for evaluating monuments based on a set of questions that the Mayor’s office could use to represent the progress of American history. In my view, guidelines for the criteria could potentially include location, who/what the monument represents, what impact it has, and why it is significant to today’s society.

A monument has a big impact on the people around it and its location. An example of a monument with an appropriate location would be the Frederick Douglass monument that was recently placed in Harlem. The monument is  significant to Harlem’s African American society because Fredrick Douglass largely impacted the black community with his heroic actions as an abolitionist. The monument shows how important he is to African American history and reminds us of the great things he accomplished at great risks. However, if we were to place this monument in another area or community, there might be a debate on its social impact in the community. Based on this we must create a criteria to evaluate a monument that includes its location and whether or not it is relevant to that neighborhood or population. Furthermore a monument’s location can impact the community, either positively or negatively. According to Archivolti, monuments can help a community economically. Most bring about jobs and more money around that area is due to the fact that many tourist may be interested in viewing a specific plaque or statue.

Moreover, when creating a monument many tend to think about who it’s for and what it should represent. Thus the criteria for evaluating a monument’s status  should break down whether this person contributed to American society. An example of that would be the Christopher Columbus monument located in Columbus Park in Brooklyn. Christopher Columbus, according to American textbooks, he discovered America.That information, as we know, isn’t historically accurate because Native Americans already owned and lived on the land.  According to Zahniser, Columbus Day is now being renamed “Indigenous People’s Day”.Critics may say “Why Columbus? He didn’t do anything important.”. When deciding on whether a monument is good in its community, one must ask if it has positive or negative connotation behind it. The most important thing is to keep a monument if it doesn’t bring about hate.

Similarly, a monument’s impact should show the “ link between the past, present and future” (Amemco.us). It should show American growth from a particular event or set of people. Monuments have the ability of bringing a community together or tearing them apart. Most are used for the grieving of those who have passed away. Examples of that would be the 9/11 waterfall for all those that died during the four coordinated terrorist attacks, the Prison Ship Martyrs monument put in place for remembrance of the prison and soldiers who died during the Revolutionary War, and even the African Burial Ground National Monument that was put in place in [dedication] to Africans of early New York and Americans of African descent. (National Park Service). The impact of a monument is very important because without significance, there is no real reason to keep a monument standing. It can be relocated to where it is best suited.

This brings me to my last criteria used to evaluate a monument which is how it affects society today. For example, some critics have said that monuments bring about gentrification. Gentrification is “the process of renewal and rebuilding accompanying the influx of middle class or affluent people into deteriorating areas that often displaces poorer residents” (Merriam-Webster). Gentrification occurs because many neighborhoods try to renovate for the attraction of that monument or relating to the removal of it. Gentrification also relates to the maintenance of monuments because with the desire to improve them may be to keep up with the neighborhood. These changes make our mayor question whether they help the economy or not. Along with that is the question of who pays for these improvements or removals. Rumor has it that they are paid for by taxpayers.

In conclusion, the protest of the removal of a statue of confederate icon General Robert E. Lee saw great tragedy, being described as one of the largest white supremacist events in recent  American history. Mayor De Blasio is being asked to conduct a thorough examination of the monuments in New York City. Criteria for these examinations could potentially include location, who/what the monument represents, what impact it has, and why it is significant to today’s society.  

 

Work Cited

  1. Archivolti, Raffaele. “Why Preserve and Restore? Importance of Saving Historical Monuments.” Linkedin, Raffaele Archivolti, 11 Nov. 2014, www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141111100252-151087658-why-preserve-and-restore-importance-of-saving-historical-monuments.
  2. Amemco. “Important Monument Information.” Important Monument Information, www.amemco.us/monument_info.htm.
  3. “Gentrification.” Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2017.
  4. NPS. “History & Culture.” National Parks Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 10 May 2016, www.nps.gov/afbg/learn/historyculture/index.htm.  
  5. Zahniser, David. “L.A. City Council Replaces Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples Day on City Calendar.” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 30 Aug. 2017. Web. 10 Oct. 2017.

 

Monuments in New York City

Leave a reply

Edwin Contreras

Profes. Rosen

English 1101

October 10, 2017

 

      In today’s society, I believe a list of criteria should be created in order to evaluate a monument, whether the monument should be removed or remain in its place. I believe the community needs to focus on the money invested into the monument. How much was spent, and how much money the monument is making. Similarly, we should also need to focus on the person/people/idea related to the monument. What history does it have behind it? What does it stand for? The location of the monument should also be evaluated. I believe monuments should have a criteria in order to evaluate and examine if the monuments should stay in the area it’s in or be removed from its location.

      New York City is having a tough time dealing with controversial monuments. I propose a criteria should be set, in order  to evaluate the monuments and see whether or not we should be removed or remain in its place. First thing to remember, what has this person done in history? Labeling the significance of the statue is an important step. What happens if we are talking about a controversial monument? For example, there is a statue of J. Marion Sims in central park, New York. DeNeen L. Brown wrote an article in The Washington Post explaining how the people demand the removal of the statute. J. Marion was known as the “father of gynecology.” Even though J. Marion was a great surgeon, the people didn’t like the idea of how he came to be. He experimented on enslaved women without anesthesia. Coming back to the idea on what has the person done in history, the people of New York City do not want to remember a man who practiced on enslaved black women. A monument is defined as “A lasting evidence, reminder, or example of someone or something notable or great.”  I don’t think the people in the neighborhood want to remember a man who was cruel to women. The residents of New York City don’t want a reminder of the treatment of black enslaved women, they believe the monument should be taken down.

       Secondly, a monument should be evaluated on the money that gets invested. Many monuments are funded by the government or by a private investor. A monument that can bring the support of both parties can be very beneficial. The 9/11 memorial is recognized for the lives lost on September11, 2001. The people that were trapped in the buildings and died, and we also recognize the men and women who risked their life trying the save the people in the buildings. David B. Caruso and David Porter calibrated in a article in nbcnew.com that states the monument cost about $700 million to build. In addition, the yearly cost to operate such monument will be $60 million. They state that the monument needs private security due to the fact that at one point it was subject to a terrorist attack. The security is also very expensive, $12 million a year. Investing this amount of money into a monument is outstanding. The 9/11 memorial is one of the top visited sites. In order to get in to see the monument, you would need to pay. The amount of tourists that visit the monument every year is outstanding, it is one of the most recognized site in New York City.   

             Evaluating a monument is never easy. Location is key in evaluating a monument. Is the person/event relevant to the region? Does it interfere with anyone? Understanding if the person is relevant to the region is not a difficult task. Doing some research on the person/event could also help us understand the true meaning of the monument. Christopher Columbus is a well known man all around the world. He is known for discovering the Caribbean islands and opening up America for European colonization. Due to the fact he is more relevant in the Caribbean’s island, we should set a monument there and there alone. Additionally, a monuments location should not interfere with anyone. Manhattan is high populated area, having a monument in the middle of the streets or even on the side of the road could affect the daily routines of people. Living in New York City, I understand how difficult  is to move around, especially with tourists. Tourists go around New York City looking for these monuments, trying to understand our rich history. These people stand in the way trying to take these photos, trying to get the perfect shot. Relocating these monuments, moving them to museums or even to less populated areas could help out the community.

      In Conclusion, in order to determine whether to remove the monument or leave the  monument in place, a set criteria should be created. A monument should be evaluated on its effect on the region. What has the individual done to stand out in history. In addition, the location of the monument could place a key role in its removal. Last but not least, money also provide a big role in its removal. Is the monument worth the investment? I believe in this set criteria, to evaluate monuments and determine if the monument should remain in its place or be removed.

 

citations:

Criteria For Monuments

Leave a reply

There are so many monuments all over the world that represents a significant event or a tribute to a person.Also monuments can portray a message or powerful meaning. However, some monuments may cause controversy against people personal beliefs or portray a racism and hate.In the reaction of these controversy people start protesting to have these monuments removed but there should be a criteria that benefits the reason why such actions should be taken inconsideration

The first criteria for a monument is if a monument is portraying a racist or a hate belief to an ethnic group it should be taken down.Today there is a lot of racial injustice still going on and these monuments represents these issue which we shouldn’t be looking back on.For instance confederate monuments such as Robert E Lee in Charlottesville, Virginia there was a violent protest against this monument to be removed because of its racist history of minorities.White Supremacist were violently protesting for the monument to not be removed because it was part of them. The result in this protest ended life of many or injured some.Also is New York more plaques that honored Robert E Lee were removed after threats from people. Removing all Robert E Lee monuments would stop portraying his racism and hate towards minorities.

Another criteria for monuments is do it portray a positive message or negative.Monuments usually represents positive influencers or message which people find it interesting.For example the Christopher Columbus monument which is located in Central Park, people painted his hands red to symbolize the genocide and slavery he committed against the Native Americans.People usually look at Christopher Columbus for discovering “America” but don’t know about his negative actions.He captured a lot of natives and brought them back to Spain and sold them.With that being said this monument should be taken because it’s doesn’t symbolize any good of Christopher Columbus.It might be history but it doesn’t show any positive message or sympathy towards natives.

Not only monuments can cause controversy but it can affect people commute or invade public space.Yes, people may love a monuments that catches an eye but it may cause a distraction such as crowds which could delay someone from getting where they suppose to.Big monuments that invade public space should be moved to a museum where people go view them,especially tourists because there mostly the ones that are amused about monuments and it’s meaning behind it.Moving monuments to museums would benefit people commute and for the monument itself because some people don’t care about monuments.

In conclusion these are some criteria that best fit the status of whether a monument should be taken down or moved to a different location.A monument should be taken down if it is portraying racism to any ethnic group of people.Also if a monument is portraying a negative message or history it should be taken down.Some monuments that interrupt people commute or public space should be moved to a museum where people can go visit interests crowding sidewalks.

Cite:

1) https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/16/us/confederate-monumentshttps://     

New York Times

2)  www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/updates/robert-e-lee-opposed-confederate-monuments-removed.html

 

Bill de Blasio Here is your criteria

Leave a reply

Monuments have been put up for many years and its purpose is to explicitly commemorate a person or event. Many figures in history have had monuments dedicated to them however, many controversial figures such as Christopher Columbus and Robert E. Lee have sparked protests. Although these men were known for their leadership they were also known to represent oppression and hate to minorities. Many Americans believe figures who represent hate and murder should not be given a monument. Nevertheless, we cannot take down a monument simply because we hate it there needs to be a non biases criteria that has a more concrete justification to remove it. The objective of this criteria is maintain stability and safety in the community if a monument fails to do so it must be taken down and moved to a local museum.
A monument cannot be taken down because we don’t like it there has to solid justification for its removal. The criteria I have created is meant to be non biases, fair, and promote safety. My the first part of my criteria involves investigating “who” this individual is. A monument cannot just go up because he was a nice guy. This monument has to have relevance to the community and its local history. Research of the foundation of this persons empowerment or historical significance is important in order to promote safety. Regardless, if the person has negative or positive background this investigation would allow us to see how the community may react and their reaction will allow to know if this monument would negatively affect safety.
The second part of my criteria refers to the safety and stability of the community because there are many lives involved. In a neighborhood, there should be no need for those who pay rent and live there have an additional burden. Controversial monuments such as the confederate statue of Robert E. Lee has spiked a lot of violence and even death. The people of Charlottesville had to have their daily routines interrupted because of police patrol and media coverage. This affects the traveling to work, school and simple daily activities therefore, this monument should not be put up. An additional, part of this criteria involves the proper maintenance of these monuments. If the statue is making the neighborhood look bad it should be removed.
The last part of my criteria helps prevent biases opinions. Everyone is entitled to look up to any individual they wish to. We cannot change people’s beliefs and opinions which is why we have so much conflict. For example, there are white supremacists in America and they look up to those who the confederate states. On the other hand, there are people that are liberals and believe these monuments of confederate leaders glorify hate and racism. To create a peace of opinions, monuments that are controversial will have a plaque that states the good as well as the bad they did. This is what makes this criteria very efficient because this criteria takes in consideration everyone’s opinion. We acknowledge the good and bad these individuals did which helps take away some of that glory they would have if the bad wasn’t stated.
During our presentations, a lot of my classmates had interesting points in their criteria. Some interesting points included how much was the cost to maintain a monument because the weather affected it.I think this is a good point because it would be a burden to continuously have to repair a monument. After evaluating the statues and one fails to meet then requirements it should be taken to a local museum. The statue would be better there because a museum acknowledges history and its place we cant condemn displays. These displays represent our history and deserve to be held there so future generations can learn from them.
In conclusion, this criteria will allow a fair display of monuments in New York. This criteria will allow there to be equal representation of opinions. I believe this is important because it will allow many New Yorkers to be tolerant of the many options that exist. If another criteria was used there will be biases. Old and modern history have taught us that when this type of criteria is utilized violence arises. We don’t need more violence we need pease but we don’t want to ignore humanities problems such as racism. This criteria covers what’s the most important thing the safety in a community while we spread awareness and tolerance. I believe if Bill de Blasio uses my criteria the people of the state of New York and himself will benefit tremendously.

Work Cited

Neuman, William. “Ordering Review of Statues Puts De Blasio in Tricky Spo.”
New York Times. N.p., 30 Aug. 17. Web.

 

Silva, Daniella. “Christopher Columbus Statue in New York City Could Be Considered for Removal.”
NBC News. N.p., 23 Aug. 2017. Web.

 

“City of Chandler Accepting Nominations for Individuals or Groups to Be Honored at Celebration Plaza.”
Lexis Nexis. Plus Media Solutions US Official News, 11 May 2017. Web. <http://www-lexisnexis-com.citytech.ezproxy.cuny.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sf&sfi=AC00NBGenSrch>.

 

Why De Blasio should use this criteria

Leave a reply

Monuments have been put up for many years and its purpose is to explicitly commemorate a person or event. Many figures in history have had monuments dedicated to them however, many controversial figures such as Christopher Columbus and Robert E. Lee have sparked protests. Although these men were known for their leadership they were also known to represent oppression and hate to minorities. Many Americans believe figures who represent hate and murder should not be given a monument. Nevertheless, we cannot take down a monument simply because we hate it there needs to be a non biases criteria that has a more concrete justification to remove it. The objective of this criteria is maintain stability and safety in the community if a monument fails to do so it must be taken down and moved to a local museum.

A monument cannot be taken down because we don’t like it there has to solid justification for its removal. The criteria I have created is meant to be non biases, fair, and promote safety. My the first part of my criteria involves investigating “who” this individual is. A monument cannot just go up because he was a nice guy. This monument has to have relevance to the community and its local history. Research of the foundation of this persons empowerment or historical significance is important in order to promote safety. Regardless, if the person has negative or positive background this investigation would allow us to see how the community may react and their reaction will allow to know if this monument would negatively affect safety.

The second part of my criteria refers to the safety and stability of the community because there are many lives involved. In a neighborhood, there should be no need for those who pay rent and live there have an additional burden. Controversial monuments such as the confederate statue of Robert E. Lee has spiked a lot of violence and even death. The people of Charlottesville had to have their daily routines interrupted because of police patrol and media coverage. This affects the traveling to work, school and simple daily activities therefore, this monument should not be put up. An additional, part of this criteria involves the proper maintenance of these monuments. If the statue is making the neighborhood look bad it should be removed.

The last part of my criteria helps prevent biases opinions. Everyone is entitled to look up to any individual they wish to. We cannot change people’s beliefs and opinions which is why we have so much conflict. For example, there are white supremacists in America and they look up to those who the confederate states. On the other hand, there are people that are liberals and believe these monuments of confederate leaders glorify hate and racism. To create a peace of opinions, monuments that are controversial will have a plaque that states the good as well as the bad they did. This is what makes this criteria very efficient because this criteria takes in consideration everyone’s opinion. We acknowledge the good and bad these individuals did which helps take away some of that glory they would have if the bad wasn’t stated.

During our presentations, a lot of my classmates had interesting points in their criteria. Some interesting points included how much was the cost to maintain a monument because the weather affected it.I think this is a good point because it would be a burden to continuously have to repair a monument. After evaluating the statues and one fails to meet then requirements it should be taken to a local museum. The statue would be better there because a museum acknowledges history and its place we cant condemn displays. These displays represent our history and deserve to be held there so future generations can learn from them.

In conclusion, this criteria will allow a fair display of monuments in New York. This criteria will allow there to be equal representation of opinions. I believe this is important because it will allow many New Yorkers to be tolerant of the many options that exist. This criteria covers what’s the most important thing the safety in a community. I believe if Bill de Blasio uses my criteria the people of the state of New York and himself will benefit tremendously.

Criteria for NY Monuments

Leave a reply

1. Who is the person or object?

2. What is their significance to the local or overall history?

3. Why was this monument put up in the first place?

4. Has this monument led to rise in death, incidents, or injuries?

5. Would a renovation or alteration to the moment change the community’s opioids on the monument?

6. What was the foundation that lead to that person’s historical empowerment?

7. Is it only there because of heritage?

8. Does this only exist to keep history alive?

9.  Does it represents the Confederacy?

10. Are tax payer’s money going into maintaining the monuments?