Should historical statues remain in place?
Following the trial of Derek Chauvin this week, we look again at the controversial focus on removing historical statues and artefacts from display.
During global protests following the killing of George Floyd in the United States last June, a memorial to slave trader Edward Colston was toppled by demonstrators in Bristol.
In the wake of these protests Boris Johnson expressed his dismay at the growing focus on removing statues and recently Sir Nicholas Serota, Chairman of Arts Council England has stated that historic statues should stay in place despite the controversy, but artefacts could instead be reinterpreted.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has previously warned, in a leaked letter, that Government-funded museums and galleries risk losing taxpayer support if they remove artefacts.
Sir Nicholas Serota added: “As far as the current Government policy is concerned on such things, we would support the notion of retaining works in place.
“Within museums… works move all the time and are constantly reinterpreted and we would therefore support that interpretation where it feels appropriate or a new scholarship emerges,” he told the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee.
The British Museum previously said that it has “no intention of removing controversial objects from display” – after it was one of many institutions, including Tate galleries, Imperial War museums, National Portrait Gallery, National Museums Liverpool, and the Royal Armouries, to receive the warning letter.
It had redisplayed its bust of Hans Sloane, its slave-owning founding father, juxtaposing it with objects to reflect the fact that Sloane’s collection was created in the context of the British Empire and the slave economy.
Do you believe that memorials to controversial historical figures should be removed completely? Do you think that removal risks eradicating our past, be it good or bad? Or do you think they can be displayed alongside information that will give a greater understanding of the era in which they lived?
What are your views?
We'd love to hear your comments
Community Terms & Conditions
These content standards apply to any and all material which you contribute to our site (contributions), and to any interactive services associated with it.
You must comply with the spirit of the following standards as well as the letter. The standards apply to each part of any contribution as well as to its whole.
be accurate (where they state facts); be genuinely held (where they state opinions); and comply with applicable law in the UK and in any country from which they are posted.
Contributions must not:
contain any material which is defamatory of any person; or contain any material which is obscene, offensive, hateful or inflammatory; or promote sexually explicit material; or promote violence; promote discrimination based on race, sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation or age; or infringe any copyright, database right or trade mark of any other person; or be likely to deceive any person; or be made in breach of any legal duty owed to a third party, such as a contractual duty or a duty of confidence; or promote any illegal activity; or be threatening, abuse or invade another’s privacy, or cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety; or be likely to harass, upset, embarrass, alarm or annoy any other person; or be used to impersonate any person, or to misrepresent your identity or affiliation with any person; or give the impression that they emanate from us, if this is not the case; or advocate, promote or assist any unlawful act such as (by way of example only) copyright infringement or computer misuse.
Nurturing a safe environment
Our Silversurfers community is designed to foster friendships, based on trust, honesty, integrity and loyalty and is underpinned by these values.
We don't tolerate swearing, and reserve the right to remove any posts which we feel may offend others... let's keep it friendly!