The statue: the good, the bad and the ugly

Re: “Statue debate shows that more voices are being heard,” comment, Aug. 15. Prof. Lynne Marks’ article strongly supports the removal of Sir John A. Macdonald’s statue on grounds similar to those used to justify the removal of Confederate statues in the United States, namely, the overt racism of the historical person.

The removal of these Confederate statues is based on cogent reasoning.

The statues represented figures whose only claim to fame was defending a wholly immoral cause — slavery.

Not to remove them gives credit to the cause they espoused, thereby offending those whose ancestors suffered greatly, the effects of which still remain part of American society.

But Macdonald was different. The above descriptors of Confederate “heroes” apply to him, in spades. But he also was the father of Confederation who positively affected all of us, to this day. His statue represents a complex person who demonstrated both tremendous political wisdom and crass racism.

History is full of such people. Should we obliterate the memory of such people, or remind ourselves that some historical characters can be monsters in some regards in spite of being heroes in others?

I would have preferred that the statue remain, but with a large display, reading as follows: “John A. Macdonald was the major political figure in creating the Confederation of provinces, leading to the establishment of Canada as a country. However, he was profoundly racist, in particular against Native Canadians, espousing vitriolic hate mongering. This statue serves as a reminder of the best and the worst in Canadian history.” Adrian Fine, MD Victoria