OUR COLLECTIVE post-Sept. 11 identity was supposed to be one of unity and renewed patriotism, but nothing divides Americans like questions of political correctness and racial sensitivity.
Recent plans to build a memorial to New York's firefighters have been met with controversy. The proposed statue would mimic the now well-known photo of three firefighters raising the American flag at ground zero. The objections are not with such a memorial being built, but with planned alterations to the scene.
The three firefighters who actually planted the flag were all white males. The proposed statue would depict one white, one black and one Hispanic firefighter. Objections to this plan are poorly founded.
The property management company that owns the land on which the fire department's Brooklyn headquarters stands commissioned the statue. That company, the makers of the statue and the fire department together made the decision to depict a diverse group raising the flag.
As with any debate surrounding issues of race, not everyone can be satisfied. Given that, the decision of New York's fire department as to how they wish their fallen comrades to be memorialized should be justification in and of itself. Of course, it is not.
|
The argument has been made that altering the picture is altering history. But the events of Sept. 11 are not history; their story is still being written. The statue is not meant to be an exact replica of the photo, only a representation of the spirit embodied by that moment and a way to remember the 343 firefighters who died.
The events memorialized by the statue are much bigger than the brief moment captured in a newspaper picture. The significance of the picture is in the spirit behind it, not in its particulars.
As an embodiment of the American spirit, including more than one race makes the statue inherently more inclusive. As Americans, we are distinguished, particularly from regimens like the Taliban, by our diversity and tolerance. The memorial can be a celebration of those defining characteristics.
As a precise depiction of the New York fire department, the memorial, as proposed, is on shakier ground. A very small proportion of the city's firefighters are either black or Hispanic. Nevertheless, by representing more than one archetype, the fire department remembers those who were not white males as much as those who were.
There have also been concerns that to change the faces of the men who actually raised the flag is an insult to them. The fact is that, although these men were heroes, they are not individually famous. They are heroes because of their bravery and because they were firefighters, not because their names or faces are recognizable. Their relevant identities, as firefighters, are not lost in the statue even if their faces have been changed.
The memorial, if it survives the controversy surrounding it, will stand far longer than the company which commissioned it, the artist who constructs it or any of the firefighters who survived. As such, the memorial has the potential to influence how future generations see our current society.
A multicultural representation is a positive image because it is not a dishonest one. Yes, the majority of firefighters are white males and no, the statue does not depict all of the racial, cultural and gender diversity of the fire department or of America at large. Depicting a more diverse group, however, honors the fact that not all firefighters are white and male.
The statue, as it now is planned, also captures a greater sense of unity. It can stand as a testament to the common feelings of loss and of American pride that we all felt immediately after the attacks. This feeling faded with increased racial profiling and racially motivated fear in the months following the attacks. If the statue can remind future generations, and even the current generations, of an event whose tragedy and heroism transcended race, it will be a fitting memorial to the men who gave their lives.
(Megan Moyer's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at mmoyer@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | 7 hours agoWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
PARTING SHOT: Asked and answered
By Honor Wood | 12 hours agoLooking back, the answer has been abundantly clear all along. I did it for the people.
PARTING SHOT: Risk and reward
By Charlie Healy | YesterdayThe college newspaper was nowhere on my radar, and I had no previous experience with journalism.
