Everyone knows the picture from September 11 of the three firefighters raising the American flag at the ruins of the World Trade Center. It graced the covers of many newspapers and magazines, and it's a shoe-in for the Pulitzer Prize this year. The photo is being turned into a memorial, much like the Iwo Jima photo & memorial before it. FDNY has approved the design, and it is to be placed in front of the department's Brooklyn headquarters this spring. The statue depicts one white, one black, and one Hispanic firefighter in the scene from the photo. In real life, of course, it was three white guys. I generally detest the phrase "politically correct," since it's most often used as code for knee-jerk criticism without having to think about much of anything in relation to the subject. But would somebody please explain to me why rewriting history for the sake of an insignificant point about race consciousness is supposed to be a good thing? And, by the way, where is the female firefighter? Peace.
Was that statue supposed to be about something real ? Because, heaven forbid anyone should actually make a statue about something that really happened. In my opinion, the statue is not just worthless because it is subjecting to stupidity, but mostly because it is not portraying a real event. That statue is entirely made up because it did not happen that way. Therefore, the statue is worthless, because it is in no way commemorating the bravery it should.
I see your point. If it were just an artist's tribute to what happened to FDNY on that day, I would have no problem with doing the multicultural thing. The problem here is that the artist is not just doing a tribute. The statue is based on a real image, and it seems horribly insulting to me to pretend that those people were other than they are. Why on earth do you need to change that image? Peace.
If they wanted to fairly represent all the firefighters of New York, or all the types of people who made up the USA, then I think 75% should be white, 12% should be black, 1% should be native american, 4% should be Asian, et cetera... To me, picking those three races as representative of all of the USA is racist. They are deliberately singling out them and representing them unfairly, as far as numbers are concerned. Why is one of the three not painted up as Japanese, or Turkish, or Inuit? Screwing around with the facts as they are is nothing but an attempt to feel better about themselves, because they have no real idea what they are on about. Fair is fair, a half-arsed attempt to pretend to be fair is a joke. Also, it's not fair to the three who were really there. Or do you think it's all right to say John Brown, Joe Simth, and Bob Jones were the first people on the moon? Maybe Neil Armstrong should be renamed Jesus DeSilva and painted as Mexican. Maybe that would make everyone feel better. This obsession some people have with races and such is so damn stupid. The three guys were white; why feel the need to screw with the picture, with the reality?
Majority rules. Blacks are majority among other minorities. So they mostly ignore the real minorities in job and society. The funny thing is, to be politically correct, when somebody sees a bunch of white men (as the case with upper management in large corporations) , they try to add a few token minorities like this: Boss says, we need minorities among Female, Black, Disable, Hispanic. Search goes out to find a black female that is on a wheel chair with a Hispanic descent. What a country!
Hmm ... Iwo Jima First off: And, by the way, where is the female firefighter? Bravo, Goofyfish! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Okay, a couple of points about this memorial .... People have likened this disaster to Pearl Harbor. I disagree in the specific sense that we knew the Japanese were coming. Incidentally, the best "evidence" I've seen to the contrary is a pop-culture historian's assertion that we didn't know the Japanese were coming because we sent the fleet out to sea instead of defending the harbor. That was the point, though. We needed an excuse to get into the war; the fleet was sent to sea so it wasn't destroyed. I've seen at least three television/video references in my day to the fact that we court-martialed people to prevent the word from spreading that the Zeroes were coming, the Zeroes were coming. I'd like to think that when I say of WTC that we all knew it was coming that I'm not referring to that knowledge. However, considerations of WWII are apropos. I'm currently searching for any article that speaks of it, but I remember reading a magazine bit probably ten years ago that reminded me that the famous photo at Iwo Jima is a fake. That is, the flag was up and the photographer said, "Do that again so I can take a picture." Also of Iwo Jima it is worth noting that the last surviving member of that cadre in the photo died in Washington, DC, during the Clinton administration. Turned out of VA hospitals during the Reagan administration, he died of exposure sleeping on the street some six blocks from the White House. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
This changing pics to make it all fit with the politically correct party line reminds me so much of standard Ingsoc doublegoodthink...
Supporters of these changes say that it shows that people can come together across multi-cultural boundaries. It seems to me that all of these attempts to bring the races together can only separate them further. As this is not an artist's interpretation of an event, changing the facts seems to highlight the fact that race is important. If race isn't such a big deal, then why can't we just leave the actual image unchanged and symbolize this cooperation through one race? My mind skitters in a multitude of directions when I try to imagine the storm that would likely have have ensued had the three firefighters been black/native American/Hispanic, and an attempt had been made to change their ethnicity. If we really want to show that this statue symbolizes all people coming together, how about we take the faces entirely off of the memorial. I think that would go a long way in praising the unsung and lost heroes while making the point that all Americans are united. As it is, this memorial appears to be a colossal and public exercise in politically correct stupidity. Hopefully this will deal a strong shock to the American focus on political correctness, so that people can really be united without intermediary idiocy. Peace.
I always detested the job applications in which blazened across the top were words to the effect that this organization does not consider race when hiring. But, a third of the way down the application they ask you to identify your race. I knew very well that by declaring myself as "white" was to my detriment. For some strange reason, German-American wouldn't work to my favor either. Michael
:bugeye: I would seriously consider saying, if someone asked me my race, to say German-American. You see, I should be no less proud of my German heritage as Jesse Jackson should be proud of his African heritage. My own German ancestors probably came here after the slaves, so it's not like us white folks were always here. :bugeye: The thing is, if I said my race was 'German-American', I would be laughed at, and told that can't be a race. And really, the whole concept of combining another nationality with 'American' is ridiculous. I suppose by pulling out the term 'German-American', I'm not getting anything special, even though we may be in the minority. Pulling out 'African-American' gets you plenty.
Congratulations Congratulations, well said indeed! In my opinion the division of living things down to the species level is quite sufficient. We are all Homo sapien sapiens. My German ancestors did both wonderful and horrible things, as did the Black and the Hispanic ancestors. If we were held accountable for the crimes of our fathers we all might as well hang ourselves. Michael
Exactly. The point is-the philosophy of it. There is something to be said of someone who would say they are 'African-American' over 'American' not only becuase it relegates the identity we have as Americans as a mere undercurrent, but because it seperates us. That is simply the great paradox of this whole thing- while campaigning for the elimination of differences, we in effect get more. :bugeye: I say I am an American who had German great-grandparents. Should I then be forced to pay up for coming from the same country as Hitler? No, because I do not come from Germany. Martin Luther King was a great man but nonethless no more African than I am German. I just really don't think these 'ancestries' matter at all. I would find it interesting to go to Germany to see where my ancestors came from, but I'd leave it at that. You have to prioritize, I suppose.
I would also mention that the new model for American identity is the 'Salad Bowl' if you haven't already heard. The melting pot has proved too hot for many multiculturalists. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! What it is now is no longer a bowl where we all come in and come out boiled together, but rather a salad where the dressing is what makes us American. In a soup, a vegetable can't just opt out. It's stuck. But in a salad, either some vegetables miss the dressing, or some get more than others, or some people might not even like the dressing. You are left with the question-for someone who has to sit down to eat America's salad, how easy is it to wipe off the dressing? You can't seperate the tastes in a soup.
