The saddest reality of life is everything that lives dies regardless of how great such person might be. We all wallow and cry as we miss those we ones hold dear. One of the few ways humans have found to get a little bit of closure and immortalise their loved ones or respected individuals in the society is to build all kinds of monument in their names. It all comes in all kind ways, it can be naming a building, school, infrastructure, sport team or anything that works in the memory of the person that died or the living. This practice is widely accepted regardless of culture.
Apart from personal Individuals, this practice is also engaged in by the society to celebrate public figures who is believed to have made a level of impact in the society. Though this can be done for political reasons but then it is partly about keeping the memory of the person alive. Building monuments or other ways of keeping the memory of an incredible figure in the society can come in a grand way compared to just any personal individuals. When this is done, such monuments are declared as national treasure, just to honour the amazing contribution the person had made.
I don't want to mention or describe any monuments to avoid any misunderstanding about what I'm about to say next because truth is subjective to the perspective of the speaker and receiver. We all define what truth is based on what we believe it to be not what it truly is, which makes the concept of truth sad. There is a popular African proverb, "Until the lion learns to write, every story will glorify the hunter.” I guess you are already getting a little bit of idea of the angle I'm coming from.
Should monuments and tributes of people with questionable character be removed? I have to respond to this question systematically. The first thing we need to ack is, who erected the monuments and who is trying to remove it. Like I said earlier, not all monuments are without authority and the purpose they serve might not be what you think. If a monument or tribute was created not just for celebrating the achievements and memory of an important figure, what if it is just about political sentiments. It doesn't necessarily matter what is known about the person but as long as some political figures consider it appropriate to erect a monument or tributes for a specific character, all the public can do is just murmur.
Any action towards such monuments will be considered an act of vandalism and perpetrators might face serious consequences. This brings me to the second question, who is removing it? If the same set of individuals that erected the monuments or individuals with equal power and authority to those that erected it, it becomes a lot easier to remove but then, when it is about the people's outcry about wanting to remove a specific monument or erase tribute made to an individual, it becomes an issue of activism.
The thing about the society is, it is made up of people with different kind of personality, perspective and interest. While some people might feel the individual the monuments was built in his/her name is undeserving of such honour or respect due to questionable character, others might think the person actually worth the tribute. It becomes a we VS them kind of challenge. Should it be removed or not? personally, I believe monuments should never have been built for individuals with questionable character especially if such tribute or monument will be considered a national treasure but then, not all monuments and tributes are made just because the person deserves it, it can just be political or power play.
This write-up was inspired by weekly featured content titled History remembers in hive learners community.
Cover image - 𝖣𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗇𝖾𝖽 𝗎𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖼𝖺𝗇𝗏𝖺
