Keeping our history alive is not easy, or without controversy
Our nation’s capital is often described as “Washington: City of Monuments.”
And for good reason. Washington probably has more memorials devoted to dead heroes, won (and lost) wars and noteworthy personalities than any other world city, with the possible exception of Paris. I never quite understood why the French have erected thousands of memorials to their many wars, since their achievements in battle, at least in the 20th century, are spotty at best.
I lived and worked among the monuments of Washington for more than a quarter-century. In fact, many of the most memorable stories I covered during those interesting years involved the groundbreaking for or unveiling of a memorial to an icon – usually a person – who was deserving of public notice and acclaim.
Some of the memorials that grace our nation’s capital are extremely moving, but none more than the stark, simple elegance of the long slab that honors the fallen in Vietnam.
Who among the millions visiting the Vietnam memorial every year has not been physically and emotionally stirred by the mere presence of all those names – more than 58,000 of them – carved into the granite-like wall?
As we know, virtually everything that happens in Washington is preceded by lengthy, heated battles among a host of contrarian voices. Look no further than the paralyzed and polarized U.S. Congress. It was also true about the stunningly simple design to remember those who died in the Vietnam War. And it’s true today, over plans to construct a memorial to former president and soldier Dwight D. Eisenhower.
In the case of the Vietnam “wall,” a fledgling architect while still in college, Maya Lin, won first prize in a competition for her vision of the memorial. But, before construction could begin, pressure was applied by several groups to modify Miss Lin’s concept. The design was altered to meet those complaints. One of them addressed the criticism that the wall was nothing but a giant slab, so statues of soldiers in battle gear were incorporated into the plan. Woman’s groups complained that their gender was scandalously under-represented in Miss Lin’s rendering, so female figures were added to the mix.
Controversy, likewise, has swirled around the approved design for a memorial honoring our 34th president. Earlier this month, members of the Eisenhower family withdrew their support from the project, but family members are not alone in passionately speaking out against architect Frank Gehry’s master plan.
Gehry, in his post-modern fashion, does little to celebrate Ike’s achievements as a general or a president. His rendering is almost a surreal representation of Ike, “the barefoot boy from Kansas,” with scant mention of the Eisenhower role as leader of the Great Crusade to destroy Hitler and, later, as an admired leader of his country. As president, Ike maintained high approval ratings through his two terms in office. Not many of our presidents can make that claim.
The Gehry design, family members say, is completely at odds with Ike’s traditional and conservative tastes. Its centerpiece is a trio of woven metal tapestries, flanked by several free-standing columns. It’s like entering a three-dimensional fantasy world as imagined by Salvador Dali.
Admirers and critics of Frank Gehry’s work remain at loggerheads, so actual construction of the Eisenhower memorial has become problematic. The task of final agreement will be daunting. You could even call it monumental.
Dick Rossé is a 36-year veteran of Mutual and NBC News and is currently a member of the Delaware Speakers’ Bureau. He can be reached at drosse@aol.com.
