When I was living in New Orleans, there was heated controversy surrounding a very visible, public statue of Robert E. Lee. Built in 1884, many New Orleans residents protested and called for the removal of the statue, claiming it was a symbol of white supremacy and historic racism. Others argued that the statue should not be removed as it represents a significant part of history that should not be forgotten, but rather understood from a new perspective of much needed change to an old system of white supremacy in America.
After hearing a segment similar to this issue on NPR, it got me thinking about the ways in which the meaning of images we see may change over time. Ultimately, New Orleans ended up removing the statue to the excitement of many and the chagrin of others.
Personally , I think the statue should have remained as a reminder. But, I think there are good arguments to be made for both. Which side of the argument do you fall on?