We are all aware of the city parks controversy
that Memphis faced last year. The city council passed a resolution that " changes the name of Confederate Park to Memphis
Park; Jefferson Davis Park to Mississippi River Park; and Nathan Bedford
Forrest Park to Health Sciences Park." The controversy stemmed over
whether or not the parks should be renamed because of their history associated with the city or if other measures should be taken to make up for their nod towards the
Confederacy. Professor McKinney mentioned in today's class that our very
own Palmer Hall is named after a pro-segregation apologist. We have
discussed in other classes about how cities, particularly Memphis, should
address buildings, streets, etc. that have controversial names.
However, the controversy that stems from one of our very own buildings at
Rhodes begs the question of how should we address this on our own campus.
The names of buildings typically
come from the name of the donor, so on the one hand, it is understandable why
the building is named after such a controversial figure. On the other hand,
however, Palmer Hall was built almost ninety years ago in 1925. While it was once segregated, Rhodes
now prides itself on diversity. From my conversations with other members of the
Rhodes community, I know that the name is a controversial issue for some
faculty and students alike. Since
its founding, Rhodes has developed its students into well-rounded, passionate
human beings, many of whom become social activists. This is evident in our reading in The Last Segregated Hour as well as in the endeavors of many of our
classmates today. I believe that
the issue of Palmer Hall will continue to grow and some students will eventually decide to
take action as they will not accept a pro-segregationist namesake for a building
on a campus that is supposed to foster acceptance and tolerance.
While I do not believe that this
conversation has evolved enough for students to take action, I do think that day will come. In President Rhodes’ own words, “Southwestern
cannot be bought.” Therefore, if the College’s principles are more important
than money, should appropriate steps be taken to change the name of the
building? Can anything be done about the name or should another measure be
taken to counteract the problematic namesake?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/02/06/memphis-parks-confederate-ku-klux-klan/1895549/
My hometown faced a similar issue last year when people began arguing for a renaming of Brady Street because it was named after Tate Brady, a founder of Tulsa who also played a large role in bringing the KKK to the city. While I appreciated the creativity, I was disappointed with my city’s response, which was to officially change the namesake of the street from Tate Brady to Matthew Brady, a Civil War photographer with no connection to Tulsa, because it did not do enough to stop the city from honoring the original namesake (Tulsans still know which Brady the signs refer to, even if it has officially been changed). Other measures can be taken, but in the end having someone’s name on a building or a street sign glorifies them. If “Southwestern cannot be bought,” then Rhodes should change the name.
ReplyDeleteUntil yesterday I had no idea the meaning behind the name on Palmer Hall. When buildings or parks are named after figures who are associated with groups like the KKK or being pro-segregation it defiantly raises a lot of questions and I think that there can sometimes be some grey area. I do not believe though that one can argue for something like Nathan Bedford Forest or what have you. Coming from the North where I have no experienced this problems before I find it quite shocking that someone could argue for someone with those ideals.
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to change the names and memories of public spaces. Like Ellen said, the citizens of Tulsa still remember who Brady St. is named for, and in Mississippi the black bears will always be the Ole Miss Rebels (to me). It's hard because we are the generation that witnessed the change. We still remember the history and in some cases it still causes pain. I think instead of only changing names and immediately dropping the subject, the city could foster discussion. Teach students about the past and why it was important to change names and images of certain places and monuments. That way, the history is still being learned and people are learning why it was wrong.
ReplyDelete