War Museum Controversy and Follow-up Thread [merged]

[observor 69]

Good point of view, especially the "And was you there Charlie?"
http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=a21fe40c-759b-4553-9244-52f57e4df3b5

Criticism of airmen is unjust
 
The Ottawa Citizen


Saturday, March 24, 2007


Re: War and controversy, March 23.

I read with great interest Dean Oliver's opinion article about the controversy over the Bomber Command display and the policies of the Canadian War Museum. It is all very worthy, but he left out one vital element: an offer to change the wording of the disputed panel. That's the crux of this whole affair. This will not end until that issue has been resolved.

The Bomber Boys, including myself, will continue their revolt against the museum's offensive and inaccurate description of Bomber Command's role in the Second World War.

The panel makes three main points: That "the morality and value" of the air offensive both remain contested, and that the campaign had few results until late into the war.

When exactly was that late date? Would it have been around D-Day, June 5, 1944? Before that, Bomber Command had already participated in the fight for air superiority, finally achieved in March and April of 1944. Normandy hinged on this victory.

Six hundred thousand German civilians dead? A useless statement. Bombing was taking place all over Europe -- a major part of the Second World War. The Russians suffered 20 million or more dead.

Was the morality of the bombing campaign contested? Not with the aircrews of Bomber Command. Our main concern was to keep our butts intact and survive. Every trip was a First World War-style "over the top" experience.

Such bombing was introduced by the Luftwaffe against London in the fall of 1940 and every night in the winter of 1941.

Maybe for some regrets are deeply held that it was deemed necessary to carry out the bombing raids in Germany. For the aircrews, though, morality was saved for the postwar years, when the armchair quarterbacks would be free to speak up and criticize our efforts.

Even Albert Speer, the czar of Germany's war industry, wrote of the bombing after the war that had the Allies "continued the attacks of March/April 1944 with the same energy, we quickly would have been at our last gasp."

I believe we can safely surmise that in any big, long, drawn-out war there will be many ifs, ands or buts. But I would hate to have future generations see this panel as an epitaph as it now reads. Because Bomber Command's losses were so terrible, many airmen to this day remain highly sensitive to any unjust criticism. The panel's authors should have realized this.

I am reminded of a popular buzzword of that era. For the benefit of those who so zealously guard the panel's words about our questionable war effort, I will quote it now: "And was you there, Charlie?"

King Finnie, Ottawa

 

[formerarmybrat23]

James Gordon, CanWest News Service
Published: Tuesday, June 12, 2007
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=c23b8d76-3f9b-4772-8f61-81fd79ff1e61&k=25244

OTTAWA -- A special Senate subcommittee is asking the Canadian War Museum to change part of a controversial display some veterans have claimed makes them look like "war criminals."

At issue is a Second World War exhibit that contains a single panel describing an "Enduring Controversy" and raises moral issues over the role of Canadian bombing squadrons that attacked German cities in an attempt to wipe out the Nazi war machine.

Liberal Senator Joseph Day, chair of the subcommittee on veterans affairs, suggested the museum has a responsibility to recognize it has offended some people, and should change the display. There were no suggestions as to how the museum should go about doing that, even as the politicians raised no qualms about the accuracy of the facts and information presented.


Don't try to change history. We're not into rewriting history," Day said. Tell the story and tell the facts, but tell it in a way that you're not offending, unintentionally, a large segment of the Canadian public."

The facility's president, Victor Rabinovitch, wasn't available Tuesday and wasn't expected to offer any comment until there was time to further review the senators' recommendation.

The display panel, accompanied by photos, including one of dead civilians on the street following an allied bombing, notes the mass raids against Germany resulted in vast destruction and heavy loss of life.


"The value and morality of the strategic bomber offensive against Germany remains bitterly contested. Bomber Command's aim was to crush civilian morale and force Germany to surrender by destroying its cities and industrial installations," it says. "Although Bomber Command and American attacks left 600,000 Germans dead, and more than five million homeless, the raids resulted in only small reductions of German war production until late in the war."


Day said the subcommittee was troubled by the fact much of the exhibit was dedicated to the heroic activities of individual airmen and crews, "and then you get in an academic debate on the last panel, which calls into question all of these exploits of the individuals that were highlighted in the rest of the display."

Asked whether he believed a museum was a place for academic debate, Day agreed it was.

"I think that's all part of the museum's responsibility," he said. "It was just that the juxtaposition of various facts and pictures seemed to confuse the two. I don't think it was intended, but that seems to be the case."

Complaints from veterans about the tone of the panel first surfaced in 2005, soon after the museum opened. Following threats of boycott from a coalition of veterans' groups, the facility undertook what it called the "exceptional step" of seeking input from external, expert historians.

Four of them filed reports the museum said agreed with the contention that the display, in its entirety, presented an accurate view of the air war in Europe. Two raised concerns about the "tone" and "balance" of the one panel. The museum said in March that it would not change the panel, adding its decision was final.

Veterans' groups renewed their call for a boycott and asked the Senate to intervene, resulting in Tuesday's report.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Apologies for reviving a narcothread, but it appears she DID go overseas (mods, if you feel this rates a break-away re-start, please feel free) - photos below....

The accidental war artist
Ottawa's Karen Bailey transforms sketches from Afghanistan into powerful paintings
Paul Gessell, The Ottawa Citizen, 7 Nov 08
Article link - Karen Bailey's art from AFG

The painting is small but powerful, with religious overtones. It reveals a man, with a halo around his head, lying in bed. Three people are crowded around him. A miracle is about to happen.

The scene could be borrowed from some old painting of disciples watching a saint about to be cured of some fatal illness. Actually, the scene is contemporary, depicting a wounded Afghan man, with a halo-like metal frame around his head to keep his skull intact. The "disciples" are three Canadian military medical workers at a hospital in Kandahar.

This painting by Karen Bailey, Ottawa's accidental war artist, is called X-Ray Technicians With Halo Traction. Bailey had signed up for a Defence Department art program, expecting to be sent to nothing more dangerous than some military canteen in Ottawa. Instead, she went to Afghanistan for a week last year to sketch patients and staff at a largely Canadian military hospital in Kandahar.

Bailey is finally ready to unveil some of the paintings completed in the past year from the hurried sketches she had to make in the middle of medical turmoil .....

More on link



Xray Technicians with Halo Traction Patient
Acrylic, 20 " x 20 ", 2007

Kandahar Girl Patient 1
Graphite, 11 ” x 14 ”, 2007

Morning Rounds 2
Acrylic on canvas, 30" x 30", 2008

 

[3rd Horseman]

War artists have always been an important part of Canadas battle history. In the past we have inducted them into the CF. If we just look to our past and the "War Arts Program" we have all the solutions to the current problems.......oh ya they would have to join......guess they would not so that's out. Maybe we should recruit them from school or the ranks like Miller Brittin was. Too bad we dd no start this in the 70s so we would have had great art from the past battles we fought. The separation of 50 years will be sad in the National Museum and will give Canada a false view of Canada at war.

3rd Horseman 

 

[gun runner]

I guess we can thank the governments of the day for pinching the pennies that would keep these artists away from the exploits of the C.F. . It would really be interesting to walk the halls of the war memorial and see all the artworks that were produced and the stories behind them. For shame. Ubique

 

[George Wallace]

Just another one of the controversies that plague the new Canadian War Museum:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Move raises ghosts of Bomber Command
By Paul Gessell, The Ottawa Citizen                                                                            January 31, 2009

The Canadian War Museum quietly imposed a moratorium on the acquisition of all contemporary art about 10 months ago amid a debate over what is appropriate for the federal institution's collection.

"We are asking a series of questions of ourselves, things like: What is contemporary art, why are we collecting it and what is the relationship to our mandate as a history museum?" Mark O'Neill, the museum's director general, said.

These are all big questions that have left some artists who specialize in contemporary military matters scratching their heads. Others have offered cautious approval. Still others fear the museum is in the early stages of another battle similar to the Bomber Command controversy, when war veterans, federal politicians and the museum's own board pressured reluctant museum officials to rewrite an exhibition text panel that was perceived as too critical of Canadian airmen bombing German civilians during the Second World War.

The art debate comes as military-themed artists are increasingly deviating from traditional, documentary depictions of heroic battlefield scenes to create works far more critical of military activities.

The art debate comes as military-themed artists are increasingly deviating from traditional, documentary depictions of heroic battlefield scenes to create works far more critical and questioning of military activities. An example of the new trend is the work of Ottawa artist Elaine Goble, who explores the problems military life causes soldiers and their families.

Mr. O'Neill agrees contemporary military art is often different from that of the two world wars. "It does represent a departure from the art the war museum is used to collecting and displaying."

That does not mean, however, that the museum is trying to silence artists critical of the military, he adds.

Mr. O'Neill specifically cites a painting in the museum's collection by Gertrude Kearns, depicting the torture of a Somali youth by a Canadian soldier. That painting, titled Somalia 2, Without Conscience, "is an excellent example of how contemporary art has helped to interpret an important aspect of military history."

The Toronto-based Kearns has other works in the collection, including a controversial portrait of Gen. Romeo Dallaire in the throes of post-traumatic stress syndrome caused by his soldiering during the Rwandan genocide. Some veterans have complained it is disrespectful.

Ms. Kearns says she had been aware of the moratorium because it has delayed the promised acquisition by the museum of a more traditional portrait she did of Lt. Col. Dwayne Hobbs, commanding officer of the Toronto Scottish Regiment.

However, Ms. Kearns does not seem to be concerned: "I think they have some very smart people at the war museum."

The Kearns painting, Somalia 2, is part of an exhibition of Canadian war art covering the period from Korea to Afghanistan that has just been installed at the McMichael Canadian Art Collection at Kleinburg, near Toronto. Paintings by two other non-traditional war artists, Allan Harding MacKay and Scott Waters, are also in that show, which was jointly organized by the war museum and the Defence Department.

Mr. MacKay was generally supportive of the museum's decision to formulate guidelines for acquiring contemporary art. But he also raised some red flags.

"Look at the whole dilemma that happened with the interpretive label in Bomber Command," Mr. MacKay said in an interview from Kitchener. "There are certain positions that people take through their own experiences and certain myths that they want to continue and to perpetuate when history continues to get revised, revisited, relooked-at."

In other words, contemporary artists may create art that challenges previously held views of history and those new views can not be excluded simply because they are different.

Strict guidelines could result in important military art being excluded from the museum's collection, Mr. MacKay suggested. "What might you lose in favour of setting up a very defined limit of what you can collect?"

Mr. Waters is a Toronto-based artist and a former soldier. In an e-mail, he said he supported the museum in its attempts to establish guidelines for contemporary art acquisitions and he praised Laura Brandon, the museum historian in charge of contemporary art, for initiating a more "disciplined" approach to acquiring work.

But Mr. Waters also said he would like to see more art in the collection from Afghanistan and more controversial works.

"The other issue is what we might call the Legion lobby, those reluctant to let the Canadian War Museum take a revisionist or critical role so far as art and conflict are concerned. I don't believe that Canadian War Museum makes decisions based on conservative reactions, but I am sure the Legion lobby is taken into account."

Mr. O'Neill was installed as museum director general after his predecessor, Joe Geurts, left unceremoniously in 2007 amid the Bomber Command controversy initiated by veterans' complaints. Mr. O'Neill says the art moratorium was his decision, not that of the museum board.

In deciding what art is to be acquired, the museum must look at its historical value, its potential for display and research and "how will this art help the museum continue to be a centre of informed discussion of difficult issues related to war and conflict," Mr. O'Neill said.

In the past, some additions to the art collection were rather "ad hoc," Mr. O'Neill said. A clear set of priorities and criteria are needed, he added.

That process will likely take a few months more to complete. Discussions have been in-house although they may, at some point, include outsiders before the guidelines are drafted.

"They're not meant at all to limit discussions and considerations for proposals," said Mr. O'Neill, "but just to help us understand that we know that what we are collecting is in line with the mandate of the museum as a history museum and as a military history museum."

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen


http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Travel/Move+raises+ghosts+Bomber+Command/1237669/story.html

 

[Journeyman]

Ms. Kearns says she had been aware of the moratorium because it has delayed the promised acquisition by the museum of a more traditional portrait she did of Lt. Col. Dwayne Hobbs, commanding officer of the Toronto Scottish Regiment.

I'm curious as to the justification of having some militia CO's portrait in the War Museum. Did he accomplish something operational in a Currie-esque manner that escaped my attention?

 

[the 48th regulator]

Image of the painting.  Also details can be found here.

dileas

tess

 

[Michael OLeary]

I'm curious as to the justification of having some militia CO's portrait in the War Museum. Did he accomplish something operational in a Currie-esque manner that escaped my attention?

Well, he does look ready to summon the clans and burn your village, will that do?

 

[Journeyman]

Mere curiousity.

 

[Michael OLeary]

I do like the style of the portrait.  Perhaps General Rick in FFO would be a good subject for a modern portrait.

 

[Journeyman]

That was sort of the gist of my question. A portrait of Hillier would be appropriate. Walking through the museum, you see the likes of Currie, Simmonds, de Chastelain -- notable commanders. Hell, even Tess' shot-up Iltis is suitable to display. But a portrait of some Reservist from Toronto? What's the criteria? Are our operational commanders not pretty enough?

 

[mariomike]

Quote:
> the Bomber Command controversy, when war veterans, federal politicians and the museum's own board pressured reluctant museum officials to > rewrite an exhibition text panel that was perceived as too critical of Canadian airmen bombing German civilians during the Second World War.
End Quote.

Bomber Command opened the Second Front long before D-Day. Russia demanded a Second Front in 1943. No one had forgotten the near catastrophe that follwed the Bolsheviks negotiated peace with Germany in 1917. Nor had they forgotten the stalemate of the Western Front in 1914-18. The Lanacaster could fly over Germany's front line muscle and reach Berlin long before anyone else could. And incidentally, show the Russians when they arrived what Bomber Command could do.
Bomber Command's 56,000 dead allowed Churchill to delay aggressively, while the Red and German armies destroyed each other on the Eastern Front.  Albert Speer called this "the greatest lost battle on the German side".  Speer also said in a 1971 TV interview that the bombing campaign ruled out Germany's efforts to produce an atomic bomb.

 

[observor 69]

That was sort of the gist of my question. A portrait of Hillier would be appropriate. Walking through the museum, you see the likes of Currie, Simmonds, de Chastelain -- notable commanders. Hell, even Tess' shot-up Iltis is suitable to display. But a portrait of some Reservist from Toronto? What's the criteria? Are our operational commanders not pretty enough?

de Chastelain, did I miss something? Currie and Simmonds dam straight, but de Chastelain I am not aware of anything outstanding unless maybe something in Ireland?

 

[geo]

That was sort of the gist of my question. But a portrait of some Reservist from Toronto? What's the criteria? Are our operational commanders not pretty enough?

The Canadian war effort in WW1 and WW2 was "done" by some reservist from all over Canada - so please don't get hung up on the concept of the Canadian War Museum being the repository of everything that is Regular Army, Navy & Airforce.

The Canadian War Museum should be a reflection of what the Canadian military is - both at war AND at peace.  A portrait of a Reserve LCol is just as appropriate as one of a Regular LCol... or General.  It's all part of our history...

 

[George Wallace]

"We are asking a series of questions of ourselves, things like: What is contemporary art, why are we collecting it and what is the relationship to our mandate as a history museum?" Mark O'Neill, the museum's director general, said.

These are all big questions that have left some artists who specialize in contemporary military matters scratching their heads. Others have offered cautious approval. .............

The art debate comes as military-themed artists are increasingly deviating from traditional, documentary depictions of heroic battlefield scenes to create works far more critical of military activities.

The art debate comes as military-themed artists are increasingly deviating from traditional, documentary depictions of heroic battlefield scenes to create works far more critical and questioning of military activities. An example of the new trend is the work of Ottawa artist Elaine Goble, who explores the problems military life causes soldiers and their families.

I might call BS to the Directors of the Museum of Civilization, under which the CWM falls.  If one looks at the gigantic spider in front of the National Art Gallery, opposite the Peacekeeping Memorial, or some of the other "works of Art" that the government has purchased, I really have to question the reason for this.  What would the current curators say to the works of the Group of Seven who documented the First World War in art?  What would they say of Zuber's depictions of Korea, and many other Canadian military deployments?  What is their opinion of some of the artwork they have from Somalia?  The Kyle Brown portraits and the Dallaire portraits are garbage in my opinion, but again they are contemporary art of the day. 

Personally, I don't trust the senior bureaucrats hired to run these museums.  I believe they have ulterior motives in their personal agendas to run these museums.

 

[ltmaverick25]

We need Jack Granatstein back in the war museam

 

[Kirkhill]

Anciently, when I went museums like the British Museum of History or of Science I seem to recall NOT seeing a bunch of labels or interpreters telling me a story.  I just saw interesting artifacts.  If I wanted to see portraits I went to a portrait gallery.

Problem solved if the Museum reverts to being a library of artifacts and stops worrying about the story it has to tell.  Get rid of the story, get rid of the editors.  As far as the interpretive portraits are concerned they fall under the head of "opinion pieces" and not "news".  For the "library" photographs and videoclips meet the requirement of maintaining a record of the people in question.

Now whether it is appropriate to have a separate gallery of interpretive portraits that describe NOT the subjects but the attitudes of the artists that paint them, the governments that pay them and the public that supports them, that is another matter.  Those attitudes are, legitimately, part of our "war" history and arguably are worth collecting and preserving.  But they should have nothing to do with story telling in the museum just as the museum should have nothing to do with story telling.

Government sponsored story telling is propaganda.

 

[Danjanou]

That was sort of the gist of my question. A portrait of Hillier would be appropriate. Walking through the museum, you see the likes of Currie, Simmonds, de Chastelain -- notable commanders. Hell, even Tess' shot-up Iltis is suitable to display. But a portrait of some Reservist from Toronto? What's the criteria? Are our operational commanders not pretty enough?

Well waay back when Dwayne was my rad op, the then CO thought he was pretty enough for a planned recruiting poster, but otherwise I'm with the Harley rider, WTF, Tess' jeep yes this nada.  8)

Then again I know the present head high muckety muck of the CWM from our undergrad days, so this don't surprise me at all.

 

[Infanteer]

Problem solved if the Museum reverts to being a library of artifacts and stops worrying about the story it has to tell.  Get rid of the story, get rid of the editors.  As far as the interpretive portraits are concerned they fall under the head of "opinion pieces" and not "news".  For the "library" photographs and videoclips meet the requirement of maintaining a record of the people in question.

+1.

I had the pleasure of spending the better part of the afternoon in the British National Army Museum in Chelsea - I can't believe my wife let me!  Anyways, I was absolutely blown away by the artifacts and the interactive nature on many of these pieces (including a very famous diorama of Waterloo).  Just telling history and giving some personal narrative, nothing much more.

By far the best museum I have ever been in - and free to boot!

The "Historial" in Peronne was an excellent WWI museum somewhat focused on the Somme.  Took an interesting spin on things, but it definitely provoked thought.

iper: (I just wanted to use this smiley)