I want to comment on the conquistador inscription. When I first read it, I thought about it for a while before reading the context you gave. I want to first analyze it in that vacuum. I initially assumed it to be ambiguous: they were both conquerors with iron, and Christians spreading the Gospel. Line between good and evil runs through every heart and all.
In this way I sort of like the Spaniards as a symbol for us, because they did an exaggerated version of what we did. They were both more brutal (Americans never really took Indian slaves), and more Christian (Missionary work was not central to our founding).
I think these days it is very hard to engage in healthy self criticism as a society. We either are and have always been such an amalgamation of isms and phobias that the world would be paradise without us, or we are the only light dragging the rest of the world out of cannibal savagery. I wish we were more able to see that these are both true in ways.
One of my favorite parts of Nathaniel Hawthorn is his ability to think about Early Americans this way (was sort of crazy to young adult me to realize that someone from Long Ago had their own concept of Long Ago). “The Maypole of Merry-Mount” is a great short story for this (and generally).
Now lets jump to the context. I disagree with you that the inscribers meant it as wholly negative and satirical. I assume they meant it closer to what I got out of it above. This doesn’t solve the problem of explaining what they were thinking when they wrote it. Even if it is not self loathing, I am with you that it is hard to imagine what actual humans thought to put this nuanced self reflection through Spaniards on a public building in Omaha.
I think all the negative criticism comes from the current trustees of the museum; the placard near the door thoroughly trashes the Spaniards, soldier and monk alike. Your analysis is quite good and probably is in fact what the founders were thinking. Thanks for sharing it, it helps explain the inscription better to me.
Aaah the Joslyn. Ok, so I worked for two architecture firms with a connection to this. One (Machado Silvetti out of Boston, the better of the two IMO) competed for the new wing and didn’t win. I think if they had won, it would have designed and executed better. More sensitive to the original building, and more thoughtful circulation, more interesting details, etc.
I also worked (briefly) for Snohetta, who DID win, and made that space ship new wing. I can say this because I don’t work there anymore but I don’t think Snohetta are very good museum architects, yet somehow they get all these fancy commissions. See SFMoma for example. They design with these huge gestures that look cool in the computer and little 3D models but don’t create a very enjoyable human experience for the visitor. I guess they’ve figured out how to woo trustees.
It’s great to hear your thoughts on all of it on the ground as it were, as I’ve never been myself other than knowing about it tangentially through the design competitions (neither of which I was directly involved with). So thanks for sharing.
Hi Mr. Collen,
I enjoyed this very frank look at the museum.
I want to comment on the conquistador inscription. When I first read it, I thought about it for a while before reading the context you gave. I want to first analyze it in that vacuum. I initially assumed it to be ambiguous: they were both conquerors with iron, and Christians spreading the Gospel. Line between good and evil runs through every heart and all.
In this way I sort of like the Spaniards as a symbol for us, because they did an exaggerated version of what we did. They were both more brutal (Americans never really took Indian slaves), and more Christian (Missionary work was not central to our founding).
I think these days it is very hard to engage in healthy self criticism as a society. We either are and have always been such an amalgamation of isms and phobias that the world would be paradise without us, or we are the only light dragging the rest of the world out of cannibal savagery. I wish we were more able to see that these are both true in ways.
One of my favorite parts of Nathaniel Hawthorn is his ability to think about Early Americans this way (was sort of crazy to young adult me to realize that someone from Long Ago had their own concept of Long Ago). “The Maypole of Merry-Mount” is a great short story for this (and generally).
Now lets jump to the context. I disagree with you that the inscribers meant it as wholly negative and satirical. I assume they meant it closer to what I got out of it above. This doesn’t solve the problem of explaining what they were thinking when they wrote it. Even if it is not self loathing, I am with you that it is hard to imagine what actual humans thought to put this nuanced self reflection through Spaniards on a public building in Omaha.
I think all the negative criticism comes from the current trustees of the museum; the placard near the door thoroughly trashes the Spaniards, soldier and monk alike. Your analysis is quite good and probably is in fact what the founders were thinking. Thanks for sharing it, it helps explain the inscription better to me.
Enjoyed this.
A relevant book, if you haven't read it, would be Inside the White Cube by Brian O'Doherty.
Will look for that one, thanks for the recommendation.
Aaah the Joslyn. Ok, so I worked for two architecture firms with a connection to this. One (Machado Silvetti out of Boston, the better of the two IMO) competed for the new wing and didn’t win. I think if they had won, it would have designed and executed better. More sensitive to the original building, and more thoughtful circulation, more interesting details, etc.
I also worked (briefly) for Snohetta, who DID win, and made that space ship new wing. I can say this because I don’t work there anymore but I don’t think Snohetta are very good museum architects, yet somehow they get all these fancy commissions. See SFMoma for example. They design with these huge gestures that look cool in the computer and little 3D models but don’t create a very enjoyable human experience for the visitor. I guess they’ve figured out how to woo trustees.
It’s great to hear your thoughts on all of it on the ground as it were, as I’ve never been myself other than knowing about it tangentially through the design competitions (neither of which I was directly involved with). So thanks for sharing.