Is this sculpture "problematic"

martybegan

Diamond Member
Apr 5, 2010
79,111
31,423
2,260
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"

As the commander and these troops fought for the Union to defeat the South and end slavery, and as it honors a regiment of black soldiers that fought for the right side for the right reason, you'd have to ask black citizens if they find a white commander here offensive. And if so, is it offensive enough to take down the statue. My guess would be no as these are not traitors to America at the time, they are the defenders of the United States who served honorably and helped defeat slavery. And Shaw the white commander was an abolitionist that wanted his black troops to get paid the same as white troops.

I'm sure though that the reason for this post is to attempt a 'gotcha' moment on someone. Why does such a notion even come to you? Anger over confederate statues of say Robert E Lee, who was a traitor to the US is a million miles from what you are looking for here.
 
Last edited:
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"

As the commander and these troops fought for the Union to defeat the South and end slavery, and as it honors a regiment of black soldiers that fought for the right side for the right reason, you'd have to ask black citizens if they find a white commander here offensive. And if so, is it offensive enough to take down the statue. My guess would be no as these are not traitors to America at the time, they are the defenders of the United States who served honorably and helped defeat slavery.

I'm sure though that the reason for this post is to attempt a 'gotcha' moment on someone. Why does such a notion even come to you? Anger over confederate statues of say Robert E Lee, who was a traitor to the US is a million miles from what you are looking for here.

it's more an exercise in trying to think like someone on the other side of a given debate or argument.
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
Then it shows you have absolutely no idea how the “other side” thinks
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
Then it shows you have absolutely no idea how the “other side” thinks

How so? i haven't said anything about the sculpture being an issue, I am asking to see what other people think.

I have a few points already, which I will post. Just wondering if anyone else sees the same things.
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
You just want to put your own warped spin on history. In order for black troops to serve they needed a qualified experienced leader. The only officers that fit the requirements were white. Unless you can show where a black man qualified to lead black troops was available you are just talking our of your ass.
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
You just want to put your own warped spin on history. In order for black troops to serve they needed a qualified experienced leader. The only officers that fit the requirements were white. Unless you can show where a black man qualified to lead black troops was available you are just talking our of your ass.

What spin?

I know exactly who is in the sculpture, and the history of the regiment.

Again, just looking at it, can you see anything problematic with it?
 
The horse looks far too surprised, while at the same time has a blank stare. And it's wearing a Superman amulet around it's neck.

The Shaw Memorial - Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

The commanding officer is Robert Gould Shaw (October 10, 1837 – July 18, 1863) was an American soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War. Born into a prominent abolitionist family, he accepted command of the first all-black regiment (54th Massachusetts) in the Northeast and encouraged the men to refuse their pay until it was equal to the white troops’ wage. At the Second Battle of Fort Wagner, a beachhead near Charleston, South Carolina, Shaw was killed while leading his men to the parapet of the Confederate held fort. Although they were overwhelmed and driven back, Shaw’s leadership passed into legend with a unit that inspired tens of thousands more African-Americans to enlist for the Union and contribute to its ultimate victory.

The soldiers are the 54th Massachusetts all black Union regiment.

Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
You just want to put your own warped spin on history. In order for black troops to serve they needed a qualified experienced leader. The only officers that fit the requirements were white. Unless you can show where a black man qualified to lead black troops was available you are just talking our of your ass.

What spin?

I know exactly who is in the sculpture, and the history of the regiment.

Again, just looking at it, can you see anything problematic with it?
OK, you are implying your question is a puzzle. So, having said you would divulge the answer after a few posts, it is time for you to give the answer.
 
Correct. My question is, under the current craze of "kill the Statues" can this in some way be considered "problematic"
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
You just want to put your own warped spin on history. In order for black troops to serve they needed a qualified experienced leader. The only officers that fit the requirements were white. Unless you can show where a black man qualified to lead black troops was available you are just talking our of your ass.

What spin?

I know exactly who is in the sculpture, and the history of the regiment.

Again, just looking at it, can you see anything problematic with it?
OK, you are implying your question is a puzzle. So, having said you would divulge the answer after a few posts, it is time for you to give the answer.

Thinking like an SJW I could probably point to the fact the white guy is on horseback, lording over the black soldiers.

Also the black soldiers are a bit too obviously "black" as shown.
 
Thinking like an SJW I could probably point to the fact the white guy is on horseback, lording over the black soldiers.
Like the mounted officers of the 50th Pennsylvania Infantry lording it over the white trash?

255.jpg

I'm shocked. Shocked.

But I imagine you're thinking more like a guy completely ignorant of military history.
 
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
You just want to put your own warped spin on history. In order for black troops to serve they needed a qualified experienced leader. The only officers that fit the requirements were white. Unless you can show where a black man qualified to lead black troops was available you are just talking our of your ass.

What spin?

I know exactly who is in the sculpture, and the history of the regiment.

Again, just looking at it, can you see anything problematic with it?
OK, you are implying your question is a puzzle. So, having said you would divulge the answer after a few posts, it is time for you to give the answer.

Thinking like an SJW I could probably point to the fact the white guy is on horseback, lording over the black soldiers.

Also the black soldiers are a bit too obviously "black" as shown.
Yep, I was right
 
Just wondering, with all the nuttery over removing Statues if people can find something wrong with this one.

If you don't know what it is, I'll tell ya in a few posts.

54th-memorial-nga.jpg

Not at all. It's a representation of American history.
 
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
You just want to put your own warped spin on history. In order for black troops to serve they needed a qualified experienced leader. The only officers that fit the requirements were white. Unless you can show where a black man qualified to lead black troops was available you are just talking our of your ass.

What spin?

I know exactly who is in the sculpture, and the history of the regiment.

Again, just looking at it, can you see anything problematic with it?
OK, you are implying your question is a puzzle. So, having said you would divulge the answer after a few posts, it is time for you to give the answer.

Thinking like an SJW I could probably point to the fact the white guy is on horseback, lording over the black soldiers.

Also the black soldiers are a bit too obviously "black" as shown.
"...back soldiers are a bit too obviously "black" as shown."

What the hell does that mean?
 
Why? He treated the troops as equal to white troops and died leading them into battle.

ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
You just want to put your own warped spin on history. In order for black troops to serve they needed a qualified experienced leader. The only officers that fit the requirements were white. Unless you can show where a black man qualified to lead black troops was available you are just talking our of your ass.

What spin?

I know exactly who is in the sculpture, and the history of the regiment.

Again, just looking at it, can you see anything problematic with it?
OK, you are implying your question is a puzzle. So, having said you would divulge the answer after a few posts, it is time for you to give the answer.

Thinking like an SJW I could probably point to the fact the white guy is on horseback, lording over the black soldiers.

Also the black soldiers are a bit too obviously "black" as shown.

i'm not seeing any thinking here, frankly.

officers rode and enlisted walked regardless of color.

what exactly is *too obviously "black"* about the soldiers?
 
ignore the actual history and just look at the sculpture.

Truth be told this is to me an exercise in thinking like the other side does.
You just want to put your own warped spin on history. In order for black troops to serve they needed a qualified experienced leader. The only officers that fit the requirements were white. Unless you can show where a black man qualified to lead black troops was available you are just talking our of your ass.

What spin?

I know exactly who is in the sculpture, and the history of the regiment.

Again, just looking at it, can you see anything problematic with it?
OK, you are implying your question is a puzzle. So, having said you would divulge the answer after a few posts, it is time for you to give the answer.

Thinking like an SJW I could probably point to the fact the white guy is on horseback, lording over the black soldiers.

Also the black soldiers are a bit too obviously "black" as shown.

i'm not seeing any thinking here, frankly.

officers rode and enlisted walked regardless of color.

what exactly is *too obviously "black"* about the soldiers?
They looked to much like negroes with negro features.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top