War Museum Controversy and Follow-up Thread [merged]

[the 48th regulator]

no I don't think so,

They tried contacting the regiment to get pictures, i was told. That was the last I heard of it.   Catherine Taylor did a painting many years back of our incident.

Is this the print in the magazine?

dileas

tess

 

[Art Johnson]

That'sthe one.

 

[George Wallace]

As they are married, I can see the benefits of using her print.  So easy to ask for permission across a morning coffee, than tracking down an obscure artist somewhere else. 

She has produced many fine military prints for probably every CF unit in existence.  Does anyone know if any of her works are in the CWM?

 

[Art Johnson]

Actually George the picture of the plaque wasn't taken by me It appeared in this month's KVA on line newsletter. The inclusion of this plaque will be discussed by officials of the CWM and a member of our executive.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

As they are married, I can see the benefits of using her print.   So easy to ask for permission across a morning coffee, than tracking down an obscure artist somewhere else.  

She has produced many fine military prints for probably every CF unit in existence.   Does anyone know if any of her works are in the CWM?

Some of her works are at the Museum of the Regiments, proudly displayed.

 

[Kunu]

This is admittedly a bit off the flow of this thread, but...

The CWM has an extensive collection of War Art.  They will have to rotate it through the displays over a long period of time to ever be able to display the large portion of it.  As such and with the changes in the bureaucracy there, I am sure that both paintings will eventually move. 

We can only hope.  The cynical side of me feels these paintings will receive some special treatment in this regard.

 

[jmacleod]

All members and visitors should read Journalist Peter Worthington in todays (29 May 2005) Toronto
Sun. There is no question in my mind that control of the Canadian War Museum must be permanently
removed from control of the Canadian Museum of Civilization, whose agenda is unquestionably to
turn the new facility into a vehicle to promote their anti military message. I agree, and am aware of
all the points made by Journalist Worthington, except for one; the new Museum is not housed in
an attractive structure, it is in fact some bureaucrats idea of an "attractive building". The responsibility
for operating the facility should be borne by the Federal government, but the staff including all Trustees
must have a military background, and all veterans organizations in Canada represented. In all the
considerable analysis of international museums our associates have undertaken, the only example of
anti military bias we found was the display of the USAAC B-29 "Enola Gay", the 20th Air Force heavy
bomber that delivered the first nuclear bomb on Hiroshima Japan. The display when opened contained
a nasty, anti US and anti war tirade, which the USAF Association, and the US Air Force objected to
in no uncertain terms; turned out that the "message" was created by a Canadian, graduate of the
University of Calgary AB, whose knowlege of World War II was extremely limited and biased. There
will be continuing controvery focused on the new Museum, unless there are changes, which can
only be generated by a political decision from the present Cabinet. MacLeod

 

[a_majoor]

There will be continuing controvery focused on the new Museum, unless there are changes, which can
only be generated by a political decision from the present Cabinet. MacLeod

But what will make the Cabinet move? If there is change to be made, we must do it ourselves: Agressively critique the museum's displays for errors in fact, and make sure the staff, media, your MP and the Museum's board of directors know what needs to be changed. Be polite, be persistent and be public about it.

Promote your own Regimental Museum, both by fundraising, but more importantly, get people to come and see it. If you have children at school, organize a class outing (I did for my daughters school last Remembrance Day, and they have been back to the RCR museum several times since). If you can get access to the media, get them to cover your museum on regimental anniverseries, battle honours or signifigent events like D-Day or Remembrance Day.

We have already seen the turkeys in Ottawa at work (Do you think a person like Belinda Stronich even knows about the CWM? Unless it can further her political ambitions, why would she even care?), so it really is up to us.

 

[Gunner]

Peter Worthington's article.

http://torontosun.canoe.ca/News/Canada/2005/05/29/1061485-sun.html

 

[jmacleod]

Agreed, the post by A.Majoor is an accurate and precise method of effecting change. The Museum
of Civilization formed in 1990 is a Crown Corporation, with a Board of Trustees, who are responsible
to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. A Board for a crown corporation in Canada is selected by the
familier route of patronage. The Canadian War Museum is responsible to that Board of Trustees
whose only former military member is General Paul Manson CF to our knowledge. The Minister of
Canadian Heritage is not in the present cabinet's inner circle, so it appears that the most effective
way to effect change is through the offices of MP's at the constituency level, regardless of
political affiliation, and the media, plus all Veteran's organizations. The Canadian War Museum should
be directly responsible to Minister National Defence or Minister Veteran's Affairs, Canada. It is doubtful
that the present government will consider a change in management a priority at the present time,
being entirely focused on survival, but a letter writing exercise is a good start. I would think the
Asper media, and the Sun publications will be very supportive with news and editorial comment. MacLeod

 

[Danjanou]

But what will make the Cabinet move? If there is change to be made, we must do it ourselves: Agressively critique the museum's displays for errors in fact, and make sure the staff, media, your MP and the Museum's board of directors know what needs to be changed. Be polite, be persistent and be public about it.

Good points, especially the polite aspect. Lets not give them any more ammunition. I would also suggest be "correct." If "we" point out an actual factual error or ommision in their displays then we need to ensure that we can provide proof it is so and also the correct information.  To sum up "be professional."

 

[starlight]

Ok first, my topic liine is a little off.  I would like to add  future generations to that.
I just visited the Museum and I am personally not impressed. Why? First the Kyle Brown portrait is the first thing you see . Then theres a beatiful portrait of Matchee and  General Dallaire there. I beliieve in History and truth. but I think The CF deeds in the last 12 years has exceeded both those missions. I also believe that little was said of the lives lost over the years.true the museum is still new but better tribute could be paid to those who put thier lives on the line and did not come back. I feel we owe them at least that. And after my visit I know why Chadderton was offended .
War should not be glorified. but at the same time you shouldn't whip the inocent. and the innocent are veterans, who  over the years  made a difference, and whose friends did not come back be it the great wars, Korea,Cyprus, Bosnia or Afghanistan
Also the museum struck me as leaning to the "left" when the veiw should be rather neutral. Any soldier  who has done "time on the line" and  goes there will probably draw the same conclusion.
Sure tell the story but tell it with out Bias.

 

[starlight]

I would like to think its just political  ignorance.......but it may be worse  a media game to draw people there ...... the Director should be slapped........

 

[Infanteer]

Alright, being angry is one thing but advocating an assault on Museum staff is silly and immature.... :

 

[jmacleod]

The operative word in changing and securing the Canadian War Museum to truly reflect the impressive
and established history of the Canadian military, is "pressure". Letters to Journalists like Peter Worthington, Toronto Sun, and local "Letters To the Editor" is a start - letters to Federal Members
of Parliament and Cabinet Ministers. The most effective way to secure control of the new Museum
is to (a) remove the facility from the control of the Museum of Civilization, (b) change the entire
Board of Trustees(c) find a funding process through public and private sector sources. Model we
used to provide a Business Plan to the Atlantic Canada Aviation Museum NS was the Royal Navy
Fleet Air Air Musem, RN Yeovilton, UK - much of its operational costs are provided by the British
(and international) aerospace and technology industries (who after all, provide the "toys") and
various tax incentive schemes. Many of the arrogant staff at the War Museum must be replaced,
(former military persons are the best option for this). Once the politicians in Ottawa are working
on a normal playing field, they will in my opinion, focus on change - I realize that this will not be
a priority with many of them, but many of them will listen, and hopefully effect, change. The
veterans of the Canadian Military deserve much better treatment in the new War Museum. MacLeod

 

[pronto]

"bang on" JMacLeod! I have written to my MP, and to the Veterans Afffairs Minister - (Not that THAT will be helpful).

Best tactic: pressure on politicians via news media, via advocates, via politics, etc. etc. We need a multi-faceted approach to this - the media have moved on - so we can pretty well drop that unless someone can get Chadderton to bring it up again, or poke Peter Worthington again.

Cheers

PS: Too bad Lubor Zinck passed away - now HE would have had a field day with this! heh heh

 

[sussex11]

I joined this forum so I could participate in this thread. I know the CWM well, the old building and the new. I was in fact the Director and CEO from 1998-2000.
  The new building in my view is superb. The archives and library are wonderful, the conservation and restoration labs state of the art, and even the boutique is first-rate. So are the exhibits. The critics here, most of whom have not seen the CWM, are missing the point. The 2 Somalia paintings are not featured--they are simply there with 350 other paintings. The overall theme of the exhibits is the brutality of war and the way ordinary Canadians made extraordinary contributions in the most difficult of times. In my view, that's the only interpretation possible if you have toured the place. Cliff Chadderton and Peter Worthington typically have objected without seeing the CWM. Same with most of those in this thread. In other words, go see it and then react.
  Next, the criticism of the Canadian Museum of Civlization's rule. I don't like the CMC in Hull which is a PC place and ahistorical in my view. When I was at CWM, it was the model to be avoided, and I think those who succeeded me did not swerve away. CWM is a historical museum--it's chronology and context, something highly unusual in Canada, and it's all done by first-rate historians, literally the best in the country. Viewers might disagree with the interpretation in places, but there's a rational explanation for the choices. The aim was not--could not be--to tell only tales of heroism and glory. Terrible things happened and they had to be included, but overall, the impression created on visitors is precisely as I described it above (or so the cards filled in suggest)--extraordinary deeds by ordinary Canadians. CMC played no role--zero--in deciding on content or approach. What CMC did was contribute money from its funds to build the CWM thus slowing its own projects. It was and is a benign master. Some of your contributors want DND or VAC to run the place: imagine if a government department controlled CWM--how PC would it have been in an election year?
  We who support the CF and who think military history is important should be cheering. Instead, with what I consider a typical Cdn trait of missing the point, too many people are focussing on the wrong things. I said in a speech (at CWM) with the Defence minister present that CWM will make it much less easy for government to ignore the military. The CWM is that potent a symbol. How can so many people have been misled by this silly controversy?

 

[Gunner]

Dr Granatstein, thank you very much for your post and providing context to what the CWM is trying to accomplish.  You have brought up a very valid point that many of us succumbed to the perceptions provided by the media as well as our "jaded" views of the political masters in Ottawa.  Certainly we should all see the CMW prior to forming our opinions.  I agree with your comments that the CWM has come a long way and we should be proud of what has been given to us.  I look forward to seeing it the next time I am in Ottawa.

I hope you will consider continuing your viewing and perhaps posting at army.ca.  It would be an honour to have someone of your stature contributing to our forums (in military history or through open discussion).

Regards

 

[Infanteer]

Sussex11,

Welcome to Army.ca and thanks for the post.  Your perspective, obviously being from a different "vantage point", is refreshing.  It is good to see that there is some people upstairs that are trying to do the right thing and not the "right" thing.

Anyways, much of your work is well-regarded here; hopefully you can find some time to contribute in some of the discussions.

Cheers,
Infanteer

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Dr. Granatstein - I was honoured to receive your email last week and gratified to have our discussion.  I'm especially pleased that you've taken the plunge and made your opinions known here.  I'll join the staff in welcoming you, and add a public welcome to the invitation I extended to you privately.

As I said in our other conversation, if nothing else, the vitriol in this thread is evidence of the depth of feeling many have for our military and our heritage.  I do hope that the CWM continues to evolve as the natural expression of that love we have and that the current directors will be as open to public discussion as you are showing yourself to be.

Welcome aboard, Sir.

Mike