NYT editorializes against new visitor center to "interpret" the Vietnam War
This is an idea that makes no sense. The proposal has been shoehorned through Congress, exempting it from the restriction on new construction on the National Mall. Why the Vietnam Veterans Memorial deserves a visitor center and not, for instance, the Korean War Veterans Memorial is hard to say, as is the extent to which the fund represents the majority of Vietnam veterans. The reason for building the center underground is to keep it from impinging on the Lincoln Memorial. But, as we’ve learned in Lower Manhattan, building underground will be construed as an insult, and there will be significant pressure to build aboveground.
But the most serious objection is simply that the visitor center is not necessary. The libraries and museums of this country are filled with the tools needed to interpret Vietnam. So are the curriculums of our schools and colleges. At best, the visitor center can offer only a sanitized glimpse of that deeply controversial war. At worst, it will become a political battleground. Either way, it will damage the clarity of what Maya Lin achieved.
comments powered by Disqus
- Harvard acquires Thoreau's notes on the death of Margaret Fuller
- It’s a national historic site, but hardly anybody visits the Idaho internment camp where thousands of Japanese Americans were incarcerated in WW II
- Big-time Hollywood director makes a movie about Stonewall
- HMS Victory: The mystery of Britain's worst naval disaster is finally solved - 271 years later
- A salute lost to history
- High school senior credited with debunking book by Professor Richard Jensen
- Historians at loggerheads over the AP standards
- Bettany Hughes interview: The historian on how Socrates would have solved Greece's problems
- U.K. Released Hundreds of Nazis After the Holocaust, Says Leading Historian
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?