“Retained and Contextualized” at VMI

The Jackson Arch — pre-retention and contextualization. Photo credit: Yelp

by Donald Smith

The Stonewall-Jackson-statue-at-VMI controversy is one of many, both in Virginia and across the country, where communities and their elected/appointed representatives have grappled with tough questions: how do we honor past heroes in modern times? Do we continue to honor them at all?  When do the feelings of a minority of a community outweigh the desires of the majority?  VMI, and Virginia, are just now really starting to deal with these questions, when it comes to the state’s history, up to and including the Civil War.

After removing the statue of Stonewall Jackson from the Main Post and his name from the Post chapel, Virginia Military Institute officials arranged for the inscription of the Confederate general’s name to be sandblasted off an arch, commonly known as “Jackson Arch,” of the Old Barracks during the 2021-22 Christmas break.

Four months later, on April 30th, the Commemorations and Memorials Naming and Review Committee (CMNRC), created to review all Confederate iconography on the Lexington campus, concluded its business. “[T]he VMI Board of Visitors,” said the committee in a public announcement, “voted to retain all the remaining statues and building names. Additionally, the vast majority of the other commemorative items, artwork, and memorials that had been the subject of the committee’s scrutiny because of the item’s association, however indirectly, with the Civil War, slavery, and the Confederacy will remain.” Some of the items that remain will be “retained and contextualized.”

An explanation of “retained and contextualized” appears in the “State of Confederate Iconography on the Post” document published in April: “The item should be retained by VMI, but may be moved to a different location on Post, may have appropriate contextualizing information made available, and/or may have current text revised.”

On August 1st I contacted VMI, and asked that the following question be posed to the CMNRC:

According to the “Status of Confederate Iconography on Post,” dated April 2022, many of the building names for former Confederates are going to remain on VMI Main Post. At least one of the namesakes performed noteworthy service for the Confederacy.  John Mercer Brooke was the head of the Confederate Ordnance Bureau and “designed the key features of the ironclad CSS Virginia (Merrimac).” (“Inventory and Review of Monuments And Memorials Related to Confederate Iconograpy, Jan 2021).  John Preston was a Confederate colonel who served on Jackson’s staff.  These building names will be retained, but contexualized.

If Brooke and Preston could be contexualized, why couldn’t Jackson Arch be contexualized?  Why was it deemed necessary to sandblast an inscription of a nickname off a National Historic Landmark (Old Barracks)?

I received a response attributed to Richard Hines ’66, former chair of the VMI Board of Visitors’ Commemorations and Memorials Naming and Review Committee. He wrote:

The decision to remove the Ezekiel statue of Jackson was made by the Board in October 2020 before the formation of the Commemorations and Memorials Committee.  The Committee was formed shortly thereafter to ensure that VMI’s landscape would be welcoming and inclusive for all, irrespective of one’s familiarity with the Institute’s origins and history. The actual decision making of the Committee — and ultimately the Board — was controlled by the criteria document adopted by the Board in January 2021 (the criteria document was patterned after a cultural heritage document issued by a federal agency following the 2017 Charlottesville disturbances). As a result, the original intent and purpose of the tributes were analyzed and balanced against today’s culturally and socially diverse societal interests.

On the one hand, the original intent of the veneration of Jackson was to “Stonewall” Jackson the brilliant Confederate general, not to Major Thomas J. Jackson, unpopular VMI professor. Thus, the purpose of the veneration triggers the line in the criteria document: “If the point of concern is controversial iconography inherent or fundamental to the design of the resource (the tribute), preservation of the memorial should be reviewed and only the most compelling of reasons should allow its continued display.”  The Committee spent months analyzing reasons that might allow the continued display of the Jackson tributes. The Committee concluded there were not “the most compelling of reasons” to justify the continued naming of the arch and Memorial Hall and made its recommendation to the Board accordingly.  The Board unanimously approved the recommendations.

On the other hand, the original intent of the veneration of Messrs. Brooke and Preston was to them as educators (and in the case of Preston one of the founders of and first two professors at VMI) and to their long service to VMI — between them they taught at VMI for more than 60 years, were beloved professors, and were nationally renowned in their professions as educators (and in the case of Brooke, world renowned as sailor, engineer, and scientist). So unlike the Stonewall Jackson decision in which the veneration was to his Confederate army service, the decision to maintain the Brooke and Preston tributes was controlled by a different sentence in the criteria document: “On the other hand, if the modern concern (here service in the Confederacy or enslaved person ownership) is tangential to, or not related to the recognition, the honoree’s contributions to society and VMI may prevail as reason for continued public recognition.” The Committee determined that Brooke’s and Preston’s contributions to society and VMI prevailed over the modern concerns, made its recommendation to the Board, and the Board unanimously approved the recommendations to preserve the tributes.

The Virginia Military Institute is expected to produce leaders, both military and civilian. Good leaders set good examples for the rest of us to follow, or to be influenced or guided by. Accordingly, VMI’s handling of the Stonewall Jackson statue controversy should be studied and assessed, so we can pull as many lessons from it as possible.  We should all stipulate that VMI had a very tough job here. After seeing what VMI has gone through, anyone who says that history is an easy career field might want to think twice.

Donald Smith was raised in Richmond. His mother was born in a house not far from VMI, and family members still live there.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

67 responses to ““Retained and Contextualized” at VMI”

  1. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Southern Contextualization…
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wmuMLd_lAIU

  2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    The VMI rationale is a sound one. We should not memorialize folks due to their contribution to the Confederacy. On the other hand, if some people made major contributions to an institution, they should be recognized, despite their involvement with the Confederacy.

    1. Donald Smith Avatar
      Donald Smith

      Jackson, and many of the soldiers who fought for the Confederacy, thought of themselves as serving (and fighting for) their homes, which in the early 1860s meant their states. The Civil War answered that question once and for all—nation over state. But, in 1861, it hadn’t been answered yet. And, we certainly should memorialize people who fought for their homes and their rights. Jackson went to war because his state called him into service.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Why any given man fought with the Army of Virginia is a matter of his conscience. Nevertheless, the Army of Virginia fought for the preservation of slavery.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          Indeed. Hard to reconcile that with “memorialize people who fought for their homes and their rights. Jackson went to war because his state called him into service.”

          to defend slavery..as a way of life

          this is the “divide” on the issue of “memorialization”.

          1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            Yes let’s reconcile. Any chance the present VMI honor court will give Virginia’s beloved son a post graduation drum out?
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/98c72e78eb42d22ee0234fa599be61ca5b732eb429938e28a1568506063a1976.jpg

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            Northam DID see the error of his ways, right? That’s why there is change including at VMI.

            Seems like we’re saying that if one EVER was wrong, he can never get right. If you sinned, you can never be saved…

          3. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            I seem https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/fd061989d7a82cb31f30d9e4c65a32435af31b826cd7244dade3b4d8406a1a46.gif remember Uncle Ralph attempting this maneuver to wiggle out of a jam.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar

            Yep, but the point is he did change when he saw he was engaging in white supremacy.

            I give ANYONE credit who sees what they did was wrong and changes ANYTIME over someone who insist they were not wrong even when it’s clear they are and have been.

            That’s the essential problem. We have folks who continue to insist that Jim Crow and White Supremacy are either not present or not wrong and continue the denial.

          5. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            Oh Pleeze!

          6. Everybody makes mistakes. Mr. Northam’s actions should be judged using the social mores of his time in history.

            Oh, wait…

          7. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            That was one night. Lemme see, 1861 to 1863…

          8. That was one night.

            That we know of…

            😉

            In all seriousness, though, a certain mindset has to be present for a person to even get the idea that those costumes are appropriate attire – even once, and even for Halloween.

          9. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Even then, I wouldn’t have done that, but was it funny? Well, there was Blazing Saddles and Silver Streak and the racial situations were hilarious while also meaningful.

            But, and I firmly believe it was him, his mistake is the politician’s woe — a complete inability to be forthright.

            As for dressing up as MJ for some sort of stage show? Hey, my HS football front line dressed in drag and did a chorus line. Three dressed as the Supremes, only one was really black. BTW, they were great!

          10. I agree with you. I would not want to be be judged today based on some of the stupid (and possibly illegal) stuff I did in HS and college. But if you happen to find out about something I did, I’ll fess up to it immediately.

            😉

          11. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Well, I spent a night or three in the Watertown NY graybar hotel.

          12. And he didn’t even really go to war for “his state.” He was born in what is now WV, which of course left Virginia after its vote to secede from the Union.

          13. Okay, now you’re picking nits. West Virginia did not become a state until 1863. Gen. Jackson was a Virginian.

          14. West Virginia (oddly) claims him too.

          15. I wonder why. After all, in their state, he’s
            a traitor…

          16. Probably has quite a bit to do with white supremacy, the lost cause, and more modern political dynamics.

          17. Donald Smith Avatar
            Donald Smith

            It’s shallow, even silly, to say that all Virginians fought only to preserve slavery. You’re welcome to your viewpoint, but don’t expect everyone else to share it.

          18. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            No way of getting around it. If his statue is in Confederate regalia then it’s a monument to the Confederacy.

            Take W&L. If they put a statue of Lee in civilian clothes seated with a book on his knee then they honor a W&L professor and president. Put him astride his pony in uniform with a sword then it’s something else.

            Jackson could be in blue. If VMI can’t find any other reason to make a statue to Jackson other than the war, well…

        2. Donald Smith Avatar
          Donald Smith

          You can’t condense a subject as complicated at “Why did Confederate soldiers fight” into one reason. (Unless you’re deliberately trying to be shallow, that is). They fought for several different reasons.

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            You can tell yourself whatever reason your great-great-great-whatever fought, but the Army fought for slavery.

            The Army represents the civilian authority.

            Uncle Otto wasn’t a Nazi, but he drove a tank in the Nazi Army. First and foremost Uncle Otto fought for the Nazis.

          2. Donald Smith Avatar
            Donald Smith

            Typical progressive/SJW reaction: everyone who disagrees with me is a Nazi.

          3. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            If the Foo…

    2. On its face, your statement seems logical. But it all depends on what you mean by “recognized.” Does that mean veneration, statues, building names, plaques, history, what exactly? The federal naming commission drew a much brighter line. They said anyone who voluntarily served with the confederacy should not be “honored” or “commemorated,” which is a bright line rule.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        re: ” anyone who voluntarily served with the confederacy should not be “honored” or “commemorated,” which is a bright line rule.”

        That’s the issue and especially so if such folks have been commemorated with UDAC/Jim Crow.

        Imagine being a black kid attending a college that has Jim Crow symbols and the school saying it is “inclusive” and “welcoming”.

        In my mind, this should never have been an argument/controversy to begin with.

        1. Totally agree. I understand that that’s probably easier in the military than at a place like VMI, but it doesn’t make their inaction any less wrong. When they revisit these issues next time, hopefully they’ll get it right.

    3. Yes. And Maury’s accomplishments in cartography, meteorology and ocean navigation can stand on their own merits, as well.

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        I agree. In fact, when I was a kid, I learned of Maury as the “Pathfinder of the Seas.” It was only later that I learned of his service in the Confederacy/

        1. Was your school book sponsored by the United Daughters of the Confederacy? If so, you might look into why you learned about Maury.

          1. I’m not sure about mine. Do you have a list of all the school books that were sponsored by the United Daughters of the Confederacy?

            I’m pretty sure Charles Lee Lewis’s 1927 biography of the man was not sponsored by them. It was published by the United States Naval Institute.

  3. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    Thankfully the very last VMI alum to serve as governor explained what honor really means.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b6c3a94284910d11a6e310fb6696f1f78cc4ead4b79b209205f4d3ca883f99fd.jpg

  4. DJRippert Avatar

    Despite what most people in Virginia think, there are always two sides to a story …

    https://www.vmi.edu/media/content-assets/documents/archives/CWAlumni_Union.pdf

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      and where are the memorials for Virginians and Southerners who OPPOSED Slavery? Where are the statues, school names, street names, college buildings named for them?

      1. Thomas Circle is the only one I can think of.

      2. DJRippert Avatar

        Bingo! You’ve got it! That would be contextualization. As I’ve said over and over … if Richmond had paid homage to the Civil War it would have been a lot better off than paying homage to the Confederacy. A statue of Lee surrendering to Grant at Appomattox for example.

    2. Donald Smith Avatar
      Donald Smith

      …and your point would be?

  5. They definitely had a tough job, but they didn’t do a very thorough job in grappling with the slavery issue, they refused outside opinions, and they’re still at odds with DoD and the military services. In fact, Mathew Fontaine Maury was just in the news, because the federal naming committee for DoD recommended that the USNA remove his name from a building there. VMI, on the other hand, still has a building named after him and massive statue of him there on post, presumably because he taught there and his Confed. service was “tangential” to the honorific. That of course is not the federal DoD standard, so once again, VMI is out of step. I’m also curious to see how things are “contextualized.” For example, Francis Smith was virulently pro-slavery, believed that it was a moral good, and that VMI should serve as a military training ground to protect the institution. Yet the main administrative building is named after him, his portrait sits inside, and his statue sits in front. He stays presumably for the same reason as Maury, which seems convenient, given that you can then dodge his horrific views on slavery. Will a plaque mention his views on slavery as a positive good? The foremost scholar of Smith is a VMI grad and offered to consult with the subcommittee, but was never contacted. Seems like a key piece of diligence for a body trying to do a thorough job. I understand that the BOV had a tough task, but their decisions are baffling and backward looking. They’ll have to revisit these decisions in the next decade. Bet on it.

    1. Why should the decisions taken by VMI on this issue be required to conform to the policies and procedures of DoD and the military services?

      1. Fair question. They don’t have to, but if you’re a Senior Military College (as designated by the DoD), and seek to commission 50% or more of your student body at graduation, it seems like a good idea to have your standards reflect the military’s standards.

        1. As far as military deportment, I agree with you.

          As far as decisions regarding where, how and when they honor those whose provided service to the school, they should be free to take their own choices, including how they “contextualize” those individuals.

          If the Commonwealth of Virginia has adopted policies and procedures regarding how to address the issue which apply to all state colleges, then obviously VMI should be required to follow those.

          1. They are free to make their own choice, which is what they did. My issue is how they made their choices and what those choices were.

          2. Fair enough. I hope you have a great day.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Without their “culture” they’re nothing, and by their culture, they mean it is your culture too, hence without their culture, you are nothing too.

      It is their sword. “They’re trying to change history! They’re trying to erase Christmas! They are replacing us!”

      It is their shield. “You cannot judge them by our standards today! It was their way of life! It’s how it was always done!”

    3. I agree, in today’s day and age, its pretty dumb and backwards. Most people will just see two confederates and wonder why VMI is honoring a bunch of Confederates. The building should be renamed for Robert Marston, VMI ’44, who served as NIH director, president of the University of Florida system, and oversaw integration at Ole Miss.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Q._Marston

      However, I slightly disagree with your assessment of the BoV submittee, I would give them a ‘C’. They passed, but barely, since they did remove pretty much everything with the exception of a handful of items.

      1. Agree. They made progress, which is like an F student finally getting a C. You celebrate like hell. But the kid still might not pass his SOLs, because there’s so much work to do…:-)

  6. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “When do the feelings of a minority of a community outweigh the desires of the majority?”

    When that minority has five SCOTUS seats…??🤷‍♂️

    1. Donald Smith Avatar
      Donald Smith

      Good boy. You can have a cookie!

  7. DS, I agree it’s complicated. Going back to the Committee’s articulation of its criteria, however, is the primary focus on what the man did for the Institute a logical priority for a military school? The fact is, brilliant engineers of the tools of war, brilliant tacticians of the art of war, are worth of military recognition for those achievements regardless of what cause their skills supported. I am reminded of the debate over recognizing the artistic achievements — visual arts, books, movies — produced by people who lived disreputable, even appalling, lives. It seems to me when we pile on the “Harvey Weinsteins” of the world we apply, implicitly, a rejection of the man’s personal moral choices, not of what he brought to the screen. Isn’t VMI doing the same to General Jackson?

    1. “Military recognition.” Check, it’s still possible to read about Stonewall’s military achievements, Maury’s scientific achievements, and Smith’s academic achievements without hulking monuments to them.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        The difference between history and culture? History you read. Culture has pigeon $#!^ on it.

        1. Not far off, in fact. I’m just so perplexed how people think that taking down an ahistoric, idealized statue put up to represent the imposition of Jim Crow means we’re “erasing history.” Really? I know who Hitler is. Not one statue of him outside of a Patriot Front housewarming party, so apparently statues do NOT EQUAL history.

      2. LarrytheG Avatar

        This is the core of the issue. It’s not like history is being “erased” despite the claims. Anyone who wants to learn about any of these historic figures can easily do so. There are no “banned books”. But that’s not what they want. They want the memorials to their heroes even if those heroes are not the heroes of others or black folk.

        Think about the attitudes behind that kind of thinking. Not pretty.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      One Awshucks = 1000 Attaboys.

      If we are to name an Army base for Robert E. Lee, A.P. Hill, and more Southern generals than Union then doesn’t Erwin Rommel deserve the same? Where’s the armor training base?

      So, does Dr Mengele deserve recognition for his lifesaving study of hyperthermia?

      At some point, the scales tip.

    3. LarrytheG Avatar

      If no black kids were ever going to attend VMI , that might be something to think about but when it’s an institution of higher ed training young men and women to go into the military – a climate that includes symbols and memorials that mimic Jim Crow begs the question in my mind.

      This argument, family of arguments on these issues often seem to play out as white folks on both sides with almost no acknowledgement or recognition of how black folks feel about the issue.

      I find that to be a monumental “tell” of the white complainers and critics.

      Pew Research JUST did a poll on this – I do wonder how many of the critics have read it or would believe it:

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6706689d9b272465fd20e1a68ef9dfea6d8faf6ed78d9187e69163c7d4dc13e5.jpg
      https://www.pewresearch.org/race-ethnicity/2022/08/30/black-americans-have-a-clear-vision-for-reducing-racism-but-little-hope-it-will-happen/

      When we have a discussion environment about racism and it’s impact on students and the college the might attend, and there are no black folks in that discussion nor are their views even considered in that discussion, some folks might see that as an example of White Supremacy in action.

  8. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Here’s an idea. Take down Jackson, and put up Brooks…
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mel_Brooks

    “After scoring highly on the Army General Classification Test, a Stanford–Binet-type IQ test in early 1944, Brooks was sent to the elite Army Specialized Training Program at the Virginia Military Institute to be taught skills such as electrical engineering, foreign languages, or medicine.[22] When he turned 18 later that year, he officially joined the United States Army[17] and was sent to the Field Artillery Replacement Training Center at Fort Sill, Oklahoma for basic training”

    But come to think of it, maybe VMI is where he picked up the racial humor? Whaddya think?
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TJkHykGRXrw

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Of course, there’s always “Kristin Beck
      Born in United States Flag United States
      1966-.. (age 56)
      soldierLGBTQI+ rights activist
      Kristin Beck is a retired United States Navy SEAL who gained public attention in 2013 when she came out as a trans woman. She published her memoir in June 2013, Warrior Princess: A U.S. Navy SEAL’s Journey to Coming out Transgender, detailing her experiences.”

      unless, of course, the rats burned that bridge when she was there…

    2. I’ll tell you, erecting a statue of Mel Brooks would be about the greatest thing that ever happened to VMI.

      1. Donald Smith Avatar
        Donald Smith

        That comment makes me wonder how much you (and Nancy) really value* VMI. I’ll bet that, if you gave the advocates of “change” at VMI a choice—change the institution, or blow it up, most of the change advocates would reach for the dynamite.

        Seems that most of the people who are pushing for change at VMI really hate the institution, and would like to see it go away.

        * In Nancy’s case, no one’s really wondering—it’s obvious.

        1. I mean, I spent hundreds of hours over the last two plus years advocating to get VMI to change course, including setting up a DEI fund with the foundation. That’s not the action of someone who wants to “blow it up. ” Rather, I’d say that I want it to remain relevant to the modern world. It still has a ways to go. Evolve or die. And speaking of statues, how about one to Ruth Ginsberg? Seems she’s the most impactful person on VMI since the Civil War, anyway.

          1. YellowstoneBound1948 Avatar
            YellowstoneBound1948

            Mr. Purdy, I read your postings, and I detect a subtle change in the tenor of your messages. You are more accommodating to an opposite point of view, although not by much. But it does seem to me that there may be just the smallest amount of atonement in your most recent posts. Why?

            I have to wonder whether your VMI class warmly embraces you after what you have done, for better or worse, over the last two years. Are you welcome at Reunions? Do you plan to attend your Reunions? Are you mentioned in the Alumni Magazine? Do you admire your classmates?

            And finally, are you shunned by your brother rats? It may take another decade or two for you to know for sure. I have a hunch that this is of little concern to you, however.

          2. I think your spidey sense might be a tad off, old timer. My tenor has never changed, i.e. I give as good as I get. If people want to have a sensible debate, we can have one. If people want to attack me personally, make wild unsupported accusations, or just generally be insufferable bigots, I can throw bombs too. And I atone for nothing.

            As for being “welcome” at my class reunions, it just depends what you mean. I’ve never been banned from post, have been invited to numerous events, weddings, retirements, etc. But I’ve also received enough threats from wingnuts, mooks, and poltroons–you know, the same people who made threats to certain officials of the alumni association–to know to avoid VMI social events. I have supporters, I have detractors. So be it.

  9. YellowstoneBound1948 Avatar
    YellowstoneBound1948

    Who here has given any thought to where Sir Moses Ezekiel’s statue of “Stonewall Jackson” is now? I’ll tell you where it is: It’s on the New Market Battlefield (outside of the Museum) about 85 miles north of Lexington. It’s on the same pedestal, and is there for all to see. Nothing has changed except for the location.

    Now, I am telling you this because the most tortured “contextualization” is now associated with Jackson. Stonewall, of course, was not present at New Market and had, in fact, been dead for a year, so the contextualization requires some imagination.

    Here it is: The Shenandoah Valley features a number of gaps between the many “mountains” that straddle the valley. A small army — like Jackson’s — could use those gaps to get to the other side of the mountains, thus eluding the enemy, or use those gaps to mask surprise attacks. Jackson did both. According to Keith Gibson, VMI’s historian, the New Market Battlefield is an appropriate place for Jackson’s statue because it is not that far from a gap or two that Jackson used, or might have used. That’s your context, gentlemen.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      “context” is whether you put something in a museum or battlefield or in a public place where everyone conducts normal everyday affairs.

      A museum, battlefield, historical marker is not in an everyday place and one actually wants to go there to partake of it. They CHOOSE to go there, they are not forced to see it if they don’t want to.

      Do you really not see the difference between a Confederate statue in a museum and a public square?

      I ask this politely. I do not understand. Can you explain your view and reasons?

Leave a Reply