In this episode, Angela has a conversation with Kirk Savage, a world-renowned University of Pittsburgh professor of Art History who has committed his life to the study and writing of public monuments. The discussion touches on the problematic aspects of public monuments, their contribution to historical erasure, and how we as a society and industry should consider handling the controversy of removing and storing these statues.

Andrew 0:01

Hello AMT LAB listeners and welcome to an interview episode of tech in the arts, a podcast of the Arts Management and Technology Lab here at Carnegie Mellon University. My name is Andrew Wolverton. And I'm the technology and interactive manager. Today's episode features last year's Podcast Producer Angela Johnson, and Professor Kirk Savage from the University of Pittsburgh. Stay tuned for an insight on historical monuments in our society, and new ways to think about how we honor our heroes.

Kirk 0:39

Hi, I'm Kirk Savage, I'm a professor of art history, across the bridge at the University of Pittsburgh, and have been been there for about 30 years and have spent most of my professional life writing about public monuments.

Angela 0:58

I am curious, you've written a lot about public monuments, and especially Civil War monuments. And I'm curious how you got into this subject. Um, it's definitely an important issue. But sometimes it feels like a lot of people didn't really care that much about the subject until like, this year. So how are you like, ahead of the curve? How'd you get into this?

Kirk 1:19

Yeah, well, I, I gotten interested in public monuments in a kind of, in a strange way, I actually was on a summer abroad study, while I was in college, and I had a professor in London who took us around and was really interested in public monuments. And that sort of got me the bug. And I didn't go to graduate school until several years later. And I wanted to pursue my work in public monuments then. And the reason that I thought of civil war monuments was they were a couple of reasons. One is that it was precisely because nobody was interested in them and writing about them. So I thought, you know, it's, it's really interesting to go into a field where you sort of feel like you have it to yourself, you know, because nobody else is interested in it. And, as opposed to say, you know, working on Rembrandt, or, you know, some some famous artists where there's already a lot of contention and controversy, and, you know, a lot of people have weighed in. And so I liked the independence and the freedom of it, of being in a topic that was, you know, basically poo pooed. Right. That's one have any interest, and it was also a challenge, right? So, you know, nobody in my field was interested in it. So it was my challenge to make it interesting, right. And then I guess the second reason is, you know, family, on both sides, in my have ancestors on both on who had fought on both sides of the war. And I was just very interested in in that and, and kind of exploring that more. When I went into the topic, initially, I really actually wasn't thinking so much about the issues of slavery and emancipation. And it was only by actually getting into the topic and really confronting it that I realized that was that was the issue. And that was the issue I needed to take on. So, you know, I sort of backed into that issue in a way and then it became central to my life. It's partly as my privilege as a white person that I didn't realize, when I first went into it, that that was, you know, that I was going to find myself investigating and in a really deep way, white supremacy, you know, and the, and the ongoing power of white supremacy from that era, till to the present. And, you know, because I had grown up at a time when the Civil War was romanticized. You know, I have my little blue and grey toy soldier set when I was a kid when I was a boy. And so, it took my having really approaching the subject, intellectually and academically to understand that there were really deep fundamental issues at play here that were that had been swept under the rug.

Angela 4:38

So you have written two books correct me if I'm wrong about about civil war monuments specifically.

Kirk 4:44

Yeah, well, so what I became really I became really interested in the ways in which monuments were or were not dealing with the major issue of the war which was which was slavery right and, and so slavery had caused the war. And the war was fought over slavery, you know, there's a confederacy was a nation that was created for really for the sole purpose of protecting what they called Negro slavery, right? The right of white people to enslave people of African descent. And so first of all, it took some time to even understand that because the other has, at that point, the historic the histories of the civil war were so there was so much gaslighting still going on, about that, to really and it was it was only really in the late 19, in the mid, mid late 1980s, that that historians really began to overthrow that the old ways of thinking about the Civil War, and to make slavery the central issue that it really was. So I became really interested then. And I thought, well, how are public monuments after the war dealing with what was the central issue of the war, which was slavery? And how did how were they dealing with the second main outcome of the war, which was emancipation? How are they imagining those things? How were they? How are these monuments in the, in the language of the time, the artistic language at the time, which was figurative sculpture? How are they? What kinds of ideas were they promoting, and messages were they giving, and so on. And so, you know, that required a lot of sort of deep thinking and in and work in the archives to try to figure out because none of that was really on the surface, you know, so. So I became just as interested in how union monuments were kind of failing, failing to represent the true stakes of the war and failing to reckon with the wars outcome. I became just as interested in that as I as I was in Confederate monuments, which were denying, which were engaged in a process of basically historical denial that the war had anything to do with slavery. And I realized that this story took me well up into the 20th century, you know, the, the initial union monuments that dealt with the issues where we're in the 1860s and 70s, but then the Confederate monuments really weren't erected in large numbers until the late 19th and early 20th centuries. So and then on, you know, these monuments became even reenergized and even more important in the 1950s and 60s, when the civil rights movement was really beginning to take off. And the centennial of the Civil War in the 1960s became another opportunity for white Southerners to double down on their kind of racist, you know, interpretations of the war and so on. So, I mean, the story just kept going on and on, you know, and when I was doing the research, you know, in the late 80s, and early 90s, there were still Confederate monuments that were being re preserved, you know, refurbished and rededicated even with ceremonies and so on. I mean, so, you know, there was just beginning to be a critique of them, but at the same time, a huge amount of, you know, resources and everything dedicated to their preservation. So it was, it would be a long time, right before they were seriously challenged. It really wasn't until, you know, in in the mid 2000 teens that they became seriously challenged. So just the longevity of this story is kind of kind of amazing.

Angela 9:09

Definitely, I think it's so I've never really thought about, like, what what union monuments are also lacking into, like, we I feel like we talk a lot about the Confederacy and how they kind of change, are they the way that they tell their own history, or the South tells their history of the Confederacy and like what the Civil War was about. And to be fair, that history is also told in the north a lot but we also don't really emphasize the fact that the Union soldiers were fighting against slavery. It's a weird it's a weird thing to not talk about. But um, yeah, and I'd also heard about Confederate monuments and how they were mostly put up in the in the 20th century, and how a lot of A lot of times to, like incite fear and black communities and that all of that, which I feel like a lot of times they have the, what I like to call the Indiana Jones excuse me, like a belongs in a museum as opposed to, as opposed to just having statues out there. But a lot of times museums are like, but we don't want this because it's not really a historical object of the Civil War, if anything, it's an interesting history of racism in our country. And that in that way, it could be in a museum, but not necessarily in terms of like a Civil War Museum, it's not really a historical object in that way.

Kirk 10:34

Yeah. Well, you'll find I mean, the, there are no easy answers to what to do with these monuments. Because museums, yeah, are not. They are not thrilled to be taking these these monuments for a number of reasons. I mean, one is that there's a cost, right? Any any, these are pretty large objects. And there's a cost to storing them and stewarding them over time. And I think these museums can rightfully ask, Is it worth the cost? You know? But there's also public relations issues, you know, I mean, do you really want to take that on as a museum, you know, do you want to take take on these objects with these racist histories, and if you know, then, you know, that's, that's a tall order for them. And that requires them to do a lot of work and thinking and interpretation, and they've got their hands full already with other issues. So, you know, my experience has been, generally it's really, really difficult. It's only in it's kind of only an exceptional circumstances that I museum will take, you know, one of these problematic public statues. And for the most part, it hasn't seemed to be a solution that will work and a lot of time, you know, mostly when these monuments are decommissioned, removed, you know, from public space, they are either put in storage, like the Steven Foster monument here in Pittsburgh, just put in storage, it's that's in a plywood box, you know, in a store in outside in Highland Park and in a storage area. Or they are sometimes relocated on private property, you know, in a sense, sold right to, and that's also very problematic, because they typically, they're sold to white supremacists. Who display them on their property. And, you know, is that what we should be doing? Is that what the public you should be doing? You know, it's kind of like, you know, selling Nazi memorabilia to neo nazis, you know, it's just very problematic anyway, so there's no real easy solutions to any of this. And just to bring it back to to make one more note of the, you know, the problematic union monuments, the so called emancipation monument, though, which was on the cover of my first book. There are two there are two replicas of the originals in Washington, DC and is very much contested right now. It's in, it's fenced up in this park called linkin park on Capitol Hill. And nobody really knows what to do with it, but it's fenced up now to keep it from being attacked by protesters. And it's there was a replica erected in Boston that was recently removed, taken down from a major, you know, public square in Boston. So these, these monuments are not immune either. Right? And, and they were problematic because of the representation of the black figures and represented in a really subordinate and serve out kind of way. So, you know, so yeah, these these, these issues really extend over a wide range of monuments. And it's not just Civil War minds, either. It's Columbus, and it's Indian fighters. And, you know, white supremacy really permeates the monumental landscape.

Angela 14:25

I feel like monuments really reflect the way that in this country, especially we're taught history with, like, you know, great men being commemorated for doing great things. But this is, you know, not how the world works. And I guess I'm wondering, do you think it's like, do you think it's damaging to our society to tell this simpler story?

Kirk 14:50

Frankly, I do think the world would be better off without the hero monument probably all. You know, when all is said and done, we could probably get rid of all of them and they would probably Even if the guy's people are okay, but I think there are some, you know, there there are some hero monuments that are legitimate and effective and inspiring. But the whole idea that history is made by singular heroes, this is totally wrong, right. And it's not, as you said, it's not the way the world actually works. It has a lot of problems with it in that, you know, typically what you're elevating people as heroes who really weren't heroes, right. Or at the very least, we're very complicated people with who may have done something heroic, but also did a lot of things that weren't. But it's, it's also a way of kind of ignoring and downplaying the agency of so many other people, right. So if I go back, as an example, this this emancipation monument in Washington, DC, you know, that's a figure of Lincoln's standing over a kneeling, enslave figure, black, you know, man, who is, chains have just been broken. And the real reason that that is such a terrible representation is that it gives all the agency to Abraham Lincoln and doesn't give any agency to black people who really actually made who sort of forced Lincoln's hand and, and made him issue the Emancipation Proclamation didn't come out of nowhere, right, he issued that proclamation, because black people had been fleeing slavery in huge numbers and coming to the union lines. And so they were taking their own destiny into their own hands, right, freeing themselves at great risk. And Lincoln realized that he had a source of manpower here, for the Union Army, and that this could actually tip the scales. I mean, it was a very difficult war to win, having 200,000 black men fighting on your side was going to, you know, be a huge, you know, game changer. So. So that's the problem with that. So, you know, all those women, for example, you know, like women on in plant, women who were enslaved on plantations, who got their kids and their families together and took them and escaped and took them to Union territory, you know, mud, they don't, they don't have names, right? We don't, they're Their names are lost of historical record, or whatever. But this was, you know, there were 1000s of them, and we don't have any monuments to them. Because we want to make the great white man, the person who's responsible for this, you know, Abraham Lincoln. So I think that's the real problem with the hero monument is that it? It really denies the agency of ordinary people of the ordinary people who behaved heroically to, you know, protect themselves and their families. Which has happened across history in so many ways in so many different ways. And those are typically not honored in public monuments.

Angela 18:28

And I feel like when we perpetuate this, like, great man idea, then that causes people to want to be great men and right, that usually is not always the best way for the rest of us. Um, but I guess I also wonder like, like, if we did replace these figures, or like put up new monument, like if we just put up a bunch of Harriet Tubman monuments. Is that like, I mean, obviously, that's better. But I guess I still wondering Is that still the same issue of, you know, perpetuating this idea that there are these great people like, obviously, there are people who do amazing things, but I don't know. Sometimes I wonder if there are better uses than monuments.

Kirk 19:16

Right. Well, and so I mean, here. Harriet Tubman is an interesting example. Like Harriet Tubman was an extraordinary figure had an extraordinary person. But she also she, you know, she had a posse of people who helped her right. And that's the case with anybody, right? Anybody who's able to achieve anything that they're, they're doing it with help, typically. And, you know, so the Martin Luther King Memorial? Well, Martin Luther King was an extraordinary person, an extraordinary man, you know, who said and wrote extraordinary things, but he had a huge You know, he was one of many, many people in a movement. So, you know, it's a very interesting and good question. And there are different people come down differently on this question of whether the right response now is to just try to counterbalance all these white hero monuments with hero monuments to people of color versus those who just want to reject the whole idea of the of the monument altogether and want to and want new new kinds of commemorative solutions, you know, who want temporary monument temporary monuments performances, so we're, you know, embedding public history into the landscape in other ways that are not conventional monuments. And this is a tension, you know, tension between these two. And maybe in the end, they aren't mutually exclusive. Right? I mean, it's maybe the answer is to do both. And, but not to put all your resources certainly in conventional statute, we don't figure it if monuments. But the reason for putting some resources in that area is that, you know, think, regular people who walk around and see statuary, they want to see themselves represented in that statuary, you know, so if as long as that statuary is still up, as long as there are any monuments, like you're alone, they will want to see themselves represented for very good reasons. So I'm not sure what the answer is. I just don't I know the answer is not just just to put keep erecting more hero monuments. got we got to be doing, you know.

Angela 21:46

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I feel like right now, everyone's so focused on tearing down problematic statues that we're not thinking so much about what we what we do next.

Kirk 21:56

Right. But meanwhile, you know, meanwhile, in a place like Washington, there are all kinds of groups that are ponying up trying to get congressional resolutions to build monuments. It happens all the time every year. And, you know, there's, there's a group that is probably going to get a resolution passed for to erect a monument to the so called Global War on Terror, which would be Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, veterans. And there's all kinds of other monuments, all kinds of small, smaller, special interest groups that come in, you know, to try to get their own their own monuments. erected. But you're right, in the sense that, you know, as we talk about what to do with the whites, white supremacist landscape, and what what do we how do we respond to that or change it or I think we're along again, we're a long way away from having any sense of where that's going to go. There, there are organizations like Monument Lab, I'm on the board of that which are, are really actively dealing with that issue. And so I think there's, I'm really encouraged with, you know, there are people like Monument Lab, you know, really interesting people, diverse group of people coming together to address this question, and to work on it and a lot of different ways. So, you know, I think we'll, we'll begin to see some, but I think it's going to take, take a long time for, for solutions to start to emerge.

Angela 23:42

It's, uh, you know, it's a long term thing to try to find a solution to long term problems, I guess.

Kirk 23:53

Yeah, I mean, and, you know, this gets to an interesting question. I mean, especially for your listeners in arts management. You know, about what, what really the role of the arts is in, in society and in promoting really urgent goals like, you know, racial justice, and I still, you know, feel very strongly that the arts do play an important role in helping in bringing issues to attention and also creating or imagining, opening up the imagination, to new solutions. I think this is where the, the memorial landscape could actually do some real good if we if we unleashed that kind of creativity there and stopped thinking about permanence and started thinking about the possibilities of creativity and imagination. So that that was one reason I got so interested in these early union monuments that dealt with slavery because I Well, here was this moment, it was kind of a brief moment, like the moment we're in right now, you know, where there is a moment of possibility of like real, profound change that could happen in, in society, and that we were in one of those moments after the Civil War. And and it did lead to, you know, the adoption of the 14th and 15th amendments, which have been really so important in the history of this country, in providing a foundation, at least for you know, later for the civil rights movement, and so on. But there was this moment when we needed to imagine what an emancipated world would look like. And it was possible, it theoretically, it was possible for monuments to help imagine this, but they couldn't do it, right, because they were stuck. Because the artists, you know, the white artists who were getting the Commission's and so on, they were stuck in old ways of thinking, and and so that was a kind of tragic, that was a tragedy, really, that we could not imagine an interracial, a genuinely emancipated interracial world, that, you know, we were trying to create it with policy in the late 1860s, civil rights legislation and so on. And that's great. But that legends that that policy, those policy changes ultimately failed, right? They failed miserably. And, you know, my argument was that we also needed imagination, we needed to be able to reimagine a society that was going to be a genuinely emancipated interracial society, and we couldn't do it. And, you know, white powers that be couldn't do it. So I do think that we are in this moment where that we're in right now. We have a similar opportunity where I think imagination is really important. You know, what is this new world going to look like? How can we inspire people to create this new world, one of the ways you inspire people is by giving them some vision of it. You know?

Angela 27:08

That's, that's really beautiful. I think that's a good hopeful place to end this. But um, thank you so much for talking. Where can people find you?

Kirk 27:19

I'm happy to have anyone email me at ksa@pitt.edu? And if, if you forget that, yeah, I'm very easily found on the website. So yeah, I'm happy to engage in conversations with people. I really like to hear from perspectives of people, you know, unlike myself, particularly, or, you know, people who come from other fields and backgrounds and so on. So I'm happy to have, I'm happy to start a conversation over email.

Andrew 27:54

That was our former Podcast Producer Angela Johnson. And if you'd like to reach out to our guests, Kirk Savage, you can find his contact info on the University of Pittsburgh website, and listeners, did you notice something different? We're trying out new music for our podcast. Let us know what you think at amt-lab.org. This is tech and the arts, the podcast and the Arts Management and Technology Lab.

Thanks again for listening to the Tech in the Arts podcast. If you found this episode, informative, educational, inspirational or even just interesting, then share this episode with another arts and tech aficionado in your life, and send us an email to amplabcmu@gmail.com with your questions or ideas for content. If you want more research and perspectives, visit our website at amt-lab.org we'll see you for the next episode.

Music: Pamgaea by Kevin MacLeod

Link: https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/song/4193-pamgaea

License: https://filmmusic.io/standard-license