Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden
I think that you are making a leap from what I said. I agree that it is dangerous to measure historic actors from a presentist mindset. Like I was saying in a previous post. When it comes to historic legacies, the principal legacy needs to be determined. When it comes to player submitted to the hockey hall of fame their principal legacy is hockey, and thus, their commemoration is justified.
|
I mean, it's also about the voices of those who were ignored or stepped on in carving those legacies right. The women Hull beat, or what was essentially genocides that Churchill committed in India. For me, I think it's about an entire reorganization of how we commemorate or think of historical folks. Ie there should probably be no statues of folks.
I think too we need to be cautious about the simplification of a so called 'presentist mindset'. For instance, SONG OF THE SOUTH could be considered a product of it's time. However thinking that it's only extremely racist though a modern lens completely erasing the backlash and criticism of that film when it was released. It was retrograde even then.