• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

War Museum Controversy and Follow-up Thread [merged]

I have not said there was a political intent behind the hanging of the two Kearns paintings, because I do not believe there was one. The aim, I believe, was to show the stresses inherent in "peace" operations. And there is, in my view both as a member and as one who has worked with them, not the slightest evidence of a PC attitude among the Friends. Its leadership is as pro-military as can be--as are those who built and designed the exhibits in the new CWM.
  What is there in CWM is the recognition that politics is very much part of Canada's wars and peace support missions, but that is very different that making a "political" decision to hang a piece of art. Military art, incidentally, is not just about battles, as some appear to believe.
 
My Soul. I think the vast majority of the people on this thread do indeed believe that there was a political intent behind the hanging of the paintings. They, and I, believe that the intent was not to show stresses in "peace" operations. We believe that there are many other, and to us, less offensive, ways to show that. We feel that bureaucrats, revisionists, and the media (who prosecuted the affair to the point that the politicians became nervous) decided to rub our noses in it.

This is such a lightning rod of an issue, isn't it? I find I get annoyed just thinking about it, so do please forgive me.

We all believe that the Museum of Civilisation and CWN knuckled under to pressures somewhere in the systems (albeit, and perhaps, not even apparent or overt to them) to reinforce a shameful decision by a previous "regime" in Ottawa. The Liberals got nervous when they took power, and punished an entire regiment for the actions of a few. Something which is, and was, inherently against the ethos of the military. The Conservatives were no better.

We all very much fear that the CWM does indeed recognise that politics is part of wars and peace missions, I guess we just fear that an institution purporting in part, to represent us, in a minor way, is too aware of politics, and is required to pay homage to political masters.

You know, I also suspect that the vast majority of the thread-contributors are realists. We know politics rules (especially in Ottawa). Maybe it would help for someone to just up and acknowledge it. The ones in power, and the bureaucracy get to direct what happens in public institutions - it's a fact, and we really do "get" that.

Maybe we would just encourage and hope that the CWM recognise this by purchasing, hanging, commissioning, et cetera works of art for the other "political" decisions. I guess that we feel that the attention paid to this one incident is reminiscent of someone "rubbing our noses in it" and loudly declaiming "Bad, Airborne, naughty Airborne"...  We'd probably all go away happy if the CWM hung some other art to outline other issues, and just put these ones away for a while.

Anyway, enough ramblings for today. I really do think the architecture of the building is wonderful, the exhibit space is well-done and thoughtful, and there is a potential for this to become one fine institution! I enjoyed the place with the the exception of the great, glaring, wart on what was an otherwise potentially beautiful face.

Pronto
 
Pronto, feelings are one thing, facts another. I worked in the CWM system and I never saw a political hand affecting or trying to affect what the exhibits said. (What the exhibits might mean to you or me was, like the beauty of art, in the eye of the beholder.) Unless and until someone has hard evidence of political interference in the mounting of exhibits in the new museum, all this is, I regret to say, just blather.
 
One  further thought re Pronto's conspiracy thesis: We have a govt that can't find its way to the washroom without help, that can't even think to vet a GG nominee. How is it that the pols and bureaucrats could get themselves together to decide on the exhibits in CWM and to trash the CAR?
 
Uhhh, yeah... That's why I used the terms "believe" and "feel" and "fear".  Of course it is blather... That's the point of a forum. Conspiracy theories notwithstanding..

;D
 
QUOTE from sussex11
"I guess the question is if the VD statistic was true or not. It was. And it wasn't a plaque--merely a statistic in a list of stats. A museum is not supposed to be a place that only lists "nice" things or that simply presents kit, badges etc. It interprets. It shocks and jars and changes the way we think of events. However, I'd have preferred to say that the CEF had the highest rate of VD in WWI among the Dominions and UK troops, adding that it didn't seem to affect its efficiency"

(extract from a letter from the Friends of the Canadian War Museum dated 14 September 1999. Signed by Jerry Holtzhaur and Paul Manson
"It is vital that this knowledge and its historical legacy not be lost. The new Canadian War Museum will be a memorial and tribute to the 114,000 young men and women who died in the service of this country, and it will be a major educational and outrech centre - teaching present and future generations that the freedom and national character they cherish so much were not bought without great cost."
It goes on and asks you to contact your MP and write the Prime Minister. Gee and I thought that sussex11 and his friends were against contacting polititions. Oh and please tell me how quoting VD statisticts "will be a memorial and tribute to 114000 young men and women who died in the service of this country"?

QUOTE from sussex11
"I'm not sure what the last point is. No one supports mythical history and CWM doesn't show it. But I do believe that mention of executions in WW! would be useful; so too would something on WW2 conscripts. History happened--and museum directors/planners do no one any good by creating myths or not showing truths. Moreover, if I read the post right, the Minister (politician) intervened to correct the museum bureaucrat. Jeesh!
But the serious point is that there will be political interference in the CWM if it is allowed to happen. Everyone who wrote an MP to complain about Matchee-Brown paintings should realize what they're encouraging"
(extract from the same letter, final pararaph)

"Thank you for our continued support of this worthy project. We are at a crucial period in the developement of the new Canadian War Museum, and your voice (italics mine) is vital in ensuring that this important iniiative is not neglected or set aside. With your help we hope to build a facility that remembers and preserves Canada's important legacy of  military history, while also passing on its valuable messages and lessons to future generations."

My comments:
1- First we are encouraged to contact our MPs to build this edifice.

2 - Next we are told don't contact your MP just because you don't like something in the museum. Jeesh as sussex11 would say.

3 - The only person who is getting anything out of this is sussex11. "The inclusion of this institute in the new Canadian War Museum fulfills a dream of Jack Granatstein to establish the museum as the national centre for research into Canadian military history."


Art J.
 
I'm still trying to figure out what the hell the "North-West Resistance" is....
 
sussex11 said:
One   further thought re Pronto's conspiracy thesis: We have a govt that can't find its way to the washroom without help, that can't even think to vet a GG nominee. How is it that the pols and bureaucrats could get themselves together to decide on the exhibits in CWM and to trash the CAR?
There is a theory out there that Bureaucracies act like organisms, and will mindlessly attack any differences/loud people/changes to maintain a status quo. Someone even did a PhD on this somewhere, if I recall. It just may be, Sussex11, that the government and bureaucrats for whom you state such contempt either act as a collective (god - the borg?) or they really are smart enough to manage a collective decision at the highest levels.

Personally, I have to interact with them daily. Most of them are pretty GD smart, and a few are frighteningly brilliant.

Of course, that's the fun with consipracy theories isn't it? We can't prove anything except by trend and statistic, and we all know what we think about statistics. I guess I would agree with you - the gov't and bureaucrats are just stupid, and perhaps the CWM acted on its own to decide to insult us, and refuse to budge 'cause the positions are entrenched...

See y'all next weekend!

Pronto
 
Good research, Art Johnson. I'm not sure I got anything out of the CWM, except some personal satisfaction at the result. Contrary to what you might think, I and the FCWM are not in the same pocket. I don't vet Jerry Holtzhauer's letters and he doesn't clear mine. There's no doubt CWM used the political process to urge a new museum; that is hardly interference in the direct operations of those who do the exhibits. Complaining to MPs about specific content, however, opens the door to egregious political interference. Seems to me that is a different matter entirely--and let me assure you, you will not like the results if this occurs.
    As I've said before, CWM changes exhibits on a regular basis. Wait 6 mths and you will have something else to be unhappy about.
 
Reply to Pronto's last: I don't think bureaucrats are stupid. I do think this govt is very badly organized and all but incapable of getting its act together on anything, major or minor. I wish you joy in working within the belly of the beast!
 
I just went to the War Museum in Ottawa yesterday while visiting my uncle who lives in ottawa and i have to say its one of the best Canadian war museums ive ever been too it took us about 3 and a half hours to look thgough it and there was still a few things we didnt see so if anyones going through ottawa any time soon i recomennd seeing the Canadian War Museum there, And the greastest part of it is its not just past it has our present military there aswell.

EDIT - If anyone has been there can u tell me what u thought of it
 
On any given day, the Government of Canada has little or no interest in the operation of the
Canadian War Museum or the Canadian Museum of Civilization - both are in place essentially to
serve the public, but the consequences of the display of the Brown and Matchee portraits has
changed that. The various organizations who have complained about the portraits and Korean
War history, etc., have submitted formal complaints to Federal Cabinet Ministers. One such is
the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs who is compelled to deal with incensed Aboriginal and Metis
leaders who consider the portraits racist and demeaning - this at a time when Minister Scott is
in delicate negotiations with the leaders, and does not need to be reminded of the arrogant
response of the all white, insensitive comments by Federal employees who are employed by CWM
to serve the interests of the public. The Ministers of Justice and Canadian Heritage are involved
and the Canadian Human Rights Commission are monitoring press reports and corrrespondence.
The Minister of Justice is a well known human rights activist, who once represented Nelson Mandela.
There is no logical or pertinent reason why the Brown and Matchee portraits should be displayed
-this is also agreed by the Sun Group of Newspapers, who have and are focused on the controversy.
The weekend edition of the National Post printed a column by an obscure journalist who states that
the entire Canadian military are responsible for a sad and regrettable, but isolated incident in Somalia
which should have been dealt with exclusively in the military justice system - a spin, but for what
reason? A situation which had no political implications, certainly has them now MacLeod
 
Finally got to see the place.  Had to go before the gunners' display was pulled.  Overall the museum itself is quite nice.  Big, spacious and quite spartan in the contents.

I, like many on this thread went with kids in tow and will have to revisit to actually see any of the artifacts on display.

The artillery display is utter crap or more appropriately "scrap".  It looks like some of the old heaps from the fields of Shilo was flatbedded there and dumped in no particular order.  Very little info on the equipment and guards everywhere keeping the kids off.  Tetanus shots are cheap, let the kids play I say.

Now to the artwork in question.  Kyle Brown looks quite Asian, not native.  And Clayton Matchee's complexion was much paler than I ever remember.  Very strange since he was in a desert.

I looked real hard and couldn't find any references to either being "Natives".  As far as the artwork goes it wasn't bad, somewhat more interesting that a dress made of beef.

If natives should be upset by anything at the CWM it should be by the lack of anything on Tommy Prince.

Not a bad visit, but like I wrote earlier, I will be going again.  Afterall parking and admission are free.
 
How to make friends and......hang a couple of paintings and let the CF become even more divisive...
 
Okay, back on target.  Anymore posts about disbanding the Airborne, and I'll simply delete them.  Take it to the PM's if you want.
 
I don't think it really matters what is up on the wall. What matters is that it is history and we as a nation and an army have learnt from it. The point of the museum is to convey what war is like. So that we don't forget what people from the begin till now have done, so that we can be where we are today. Wether it was something that was condemned or awarded for.
 
given the large number of individuals who have suffered PTSD throughout all campaigns; shouldn't the CWM cover it in some way or shape? I have a number of comrades who have served with distinction but have been forced out due to PTSD issues.... should they be ignored?
 
http://torontosun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2005/09/04/pf-1201360.html

Museum flaunts brutality
By PETER WORTHINGTON

Last week the National Post ran an article that seemed a rebuke at the Sun and respected native leader, Claude Petit, who felt torture paintings displayed at the new Canadian War Museum were a slight against soldiers of aboriginal blood.

The article's author, curiously, was Len Kruzenga, editor of two aboriginal monthlies, First Perspectives and The Drum, both based in Winnipeg.

As I wrote recently, The National Aboriginal Veterans Associaton (NAVA) and Congress of Aboriginal Peoples(CAP) want the paintings of two Metis soldiers -- Clayton Matchee and Kyle Brown -- removed from the museum because they imply aboriginal soldiers indulge in torture.

Matchee tortured to death a young Somali thief during a 1993 peacekeeping mission and irreparably damaged his brain when he tried to kill himself. As a result, he was unfit to stand trial, but Brown got five years for his role in the same incident.

Kruzenga's article argued the paintings do not reflect badly on aboriginal soldiers as "both men were, first and foremost, Canadian soldiers who dishonoured the reputation of the nation they served, the uniforms they wore and their brothers-in-arms."

As justification for purchasing and displaying the Brown portrait and the painting (copied from a photo Brown took of Matchee choking the Somali with a baton) the article says, "History must be true."

Kruzenga's view is an echo of museum director Joe Geurts' comment that the paintings could be of anyone. But they aren't "anyone." They are aboriginals -- and the museum's only example of Canadian soldiers doing disgraceful acts going back to the Boer war, WWI, WWII and Korea.

That upsets veterans, as well as Petit, president of NAVA, a Korean veteran and holder of the Order of Canada.

Kruzenga was never available when I phoned him this week. Petit, who knows just about everyone of consequence in aboriginal circles, says he doesn't know him or the publications he edits. He notes that Kruzenga referred in his piece to Matchee as a "corporal" when he was a master corporal -- a mistake no former soldier would be likely to make.

Petit (who is a friend of mine, going back to Korea) says he's even received e-mails from Australia supporting his objections to the paintings, as well as support from most aboriginal groups. "If (Kruzenga) is going to knock what I say, you'd think he'd at least call me," he complains.

Anyone who has served in the army has respect for our Indian soldiers. Personally, I believe when the heat dies down, the museum will quietly take down these paintings.

In the meantime, it should consider setting up a native-Canadian corner in the museum based around Tommy Prince's WWII medals, where others of aborignal blood can also be honoured.

For instance, there is Francis "Peggy" Pegahmagabow, with three Military Medals for valour, some 378 sniper kills and 300 German soldiers taken prisoner in WWI; and Alberta rodeo rider turned sniper Henry Norwest, who won two MMs and knocked off 115 Germans. From the Six Nations Cayuga band, brothers Alex and Charles Smith each won the Military Cross.

Some 12,000 aboriginals have worn their country's uniform and served in all Canada's wars. The museum made a mistake (one of several) in spending $10,000 on these paintings, which have nothing to do with "truth" but reflect poorly on every soldier, and imply that aboriginals are prone to torture.

If this isn't the intent, get rid of the damn things.
 
Ubique and Geo both state two points that are repeatedly sidelined by quoting articles about how the paintings depict native americans in hate crimes. Most people, that go to the museum do not even know, nor care of their aboriginal heritage, and nor do most have any idea the two had ties to hate groups.

I am of course going to say something that has been repeatedly posted and ignored:

They are works of conscience, and the museum has an interest in showing the human effects of war on those involved, be they military or civilian.

Perhaps if we ignore these acts, we may one day find ourselves repeating them.
 
On the same note, I have met with Mrs. Gertrude Kearns after having heard she would be attending a certain gallery showing some of her works. She stresses the fact the paintings have nothing to do with the aboriginal heritage of those depicted.

------------------------------------
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, Aphorism 146
 
Back
Top