That’s all Cornell University biology Professor Randy Wayne said he has been able to determine so far about the whereabouts of a longtime display in the Ivy League school’s Kroch Library of a bust of President Abraham Lincoln in front of a bronzed Gettysburg Address plaque.
Wayne, a frequent visitor to the library, which houses Cornell’s rare and manuscript collections, said when he stopped in several weeks ago he noticed the display had been disappeared.
“It’s been there since I can remember,” he told The College Fix in an interview.
He asked the librarians about it, and they had no details to provide, except to say it was removed after some sort of complaint, he said. It’s been replaced with, “well, nothing,” Wayne said. The walls are white, according to photos Wayne took for The Fix.
The bust and plaque had been on display in the library since at least 2013.
On June 23, Wayne emailed Cornell University President Martha Pollack, asking about the display:
Dear President Pollack,
I am wondering if you are aware that the bust of Abraham Lincoln purchased by Ezra Cornell and the bronze plaque of the Gettysburg Address that was beside it has been removed from the RMC in Kroch Library and replaced with nothing. If you are aware, can you tell me why? Thanks.
Pollack has not responded to him, the professor told The Fix.
The president’s office and Cornell media affairs has also not responded to repeated emailed requests over the last week from The College Fix, as well as a phone call Monday, regarding the whereabouts of the Gettysburg Address plaque and Lincoln bust, and why they were removed.
“He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a soldier without cruelty; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring. He was a public officer without vices; a private citizen without wrong; a neighbour without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guile. He was a Caesar, without his ambition; Frederick, without his tyranny; Napoleon, without his selfishness, and Washington, without his reward.” Benjamin Harvey Hill (former Confederate Senator from Georgia), 1874.
“He had a calm and collected air about him, his voice was kind and tender, and his eye was as gentle as a dove’s. His whole make-up of form and person, looks and manner had a kind of gentle and soothing magnetism about it that drew every one to him and made them love, respect, and honor him.” Samuel R. Watkins, veteran of 1st Tennessee Regiment, 1881.
Last weekend, the communist city council of Charlottesville removed Lee’s statue and, as a scorched earth policy, even demolished its base.
Christopher Caldwell, in Claremont Review, marvels at how quickly a minority mob of radicals has seized power nationally and successfully enforced its own crude and simplistic ideological perspective.
As recently as 2014, biographer Michael Korda was able to describe Lee in Clouds of Glory as “universally admired even by those who have little or no sympathy toward the cause for which he fought.” Korda might have been thinking of Dwight Eisenhower, who considered Lee one of the four greatest Americans and hung his portrait in the Oval Office alongside those of the other three (Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, and Lincoln). “General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation,” Eisenhower wrote, “selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.”…
Lee had a good 20th century. The greatest biography of him remains Freeman’s Pulitzer-winning life—heroic and punctilious, if a bit purple for modern tastes. It has had its measured defenders and its measured detractors, though almost all readers accepted its assessment of Lee’s importance.
In our own century, things have changed. The urgent, invective-filled attacks on Lee that are beginning to appear would have seemed overheated even if the Civil War were still going on. …
The reassessment of Lee’s position in American history has almost everything to do with a shift in the way we talk about race. This shift has come about the way most recent shifts in intellectual fashion have—not so much because of any new historical information but because of the arrival in journalism and academia, by a process so gradual as to be almost imperceptible, of the bureaucratic oversight and litigative intimidation enabled by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
New Britain’s controversial Christopher Columbus statue won’t be heading to storage — at least not yet.
Mayor Erin Stewart on Thursday vetoed the common council’s decision to take down the statue, meaning the issue will drag into January or possibly beyond.
After learning of her decision Thursday afternoon, a top council Democrat said he’ll try to get his colleagues to override it next month.
In a statement condemning “cancel culture,” Stewart warned taking down the monument would set a bad precedent. …
The veto was the latest twist in a local culture battle that began with the nationwide campaign to pull down Columbus statues after the George Floyd protests in June.
Republican leaders and Italian-American groups in New Britain largely pushed to keep the city’s statue in McCabe Park, while Puerto Rican activists, the New Britain Racial Justice Coalition and council Democrats argued it should be moved off city property.
The arguments largely mirror those in cities across the country: Columbus’ defenders portray him as a brave explorer and symbol of Italian-American heritage, while critics say he was a genocidal slave trader and racist.
But earlier this month, several council Republicans sided with Democrats in a 10-4 vote to take it down.
Stewart said Thursday that they never explained how the city would pay to remove it, nor what would replace it at the park. She signaled that she might reconsider if the council provides detailed answers,
“If the council is going to retire Columbus, they ought to have a concurrent and concrete plan for what will go in its place,” she wrote, saying anything less would be an affront to Italian-Americans.
Democratic Alderman Chris Anderson, one of the most outspoken voices demanding removal of the statue, said Thursday afternoon that he’ll look to override the veto next month. That would take 10 votes; currently the council has 14 members because Democrat Emmanuel Sanchez’s seat has been vacant since he resigned last week.
If the Republican aldermen who voted with Democrats also vote to override the veto, they’d prevail. But the GOP caucus has long been loyal to Stewart, and Alderman Sharon Beloin-Saavedra was the only Republican who has appeared passionate about removing the statue.
I think she has a good chance of winning. There are a lot of Italians in Connecticut. And how come the Puerto Ricans, descendants of the Spaniards after all, are on the wrong side? Did some Marxist professor convince them that they all descend from Caribbean cannibals?
A Brown University student group, Decolonization at Brown, wants the school to remove two Roman statues displayed on campus, claiming the statues represent white supremacy and colonialism.
The student group at the Ivy League university in Rhode Island has lobbied the schoolâ€™s Undergraduate Council of Students to support its initiative to remove of statues of Roman Emperors Caesar Augustus and Marcus Aurelius.
Removing the statues â€œis one step in a broader project of decolonization by confronting Brownâ€™s institutional and ideological legacies of colonialism and white supremacy,â€ members of the group wrote in The Blognonian, a student publication at the university.
The Undergraduate Council is scheduled to vote on endorsing the initiative on Thursday after it bumped the vote, originally scheduled for October 22.
Jason Carroll, the student body president, would not comment on the proposal yet because the body has yet to hold a vote.
â€œThere is not a resolution and the potential endorsement would be for an on-going student initiative run by Decolonization at Brown,â€ Carroll said via email to The College Fix.
â€œIt is not that difficult to see how a statue of (Caesar Augustus) would serve as an icon of colonial and imperial domination,â€ Kelley Tackett, a leader of the decolonization group, said at an October 14 Undergraduate Council meeting.
â€œThey function not as monuments to ancient Rome, but to a set of values and political stances which existed when they were commissioned on Brownâ€™s campus,â€ Tackett said, according to student paper The Brown Daily Herald.
The Caesar Augustus statue has been on campus since 1906 and the Marcus Aurelius statue has been on campus since 1908, according to a university website.
Sam Kimball, another student leader, asked â€œwhat kind of impactâ€ the statues have on â€œstudent well-being and inclusion of students of color,â€ according to the Daily Herald.
Junaid Malik, a leader in the effort, said, according to the student paper:
For those of us who come from countries that were also colonized, these statues carry the symbolism of conquest, one that we think is incompatible with the continued occupation of Indigenous land in the U.S.
It was not dead Abenakis from Canada that vandalized the statue of Hannah Duston in Haverhill, New Hampshire.
Excerpted from the (seriously tainted by Leftist BS) Wikipedia account:
During King William’s War, Hannah, her husband Thomas, and their eight children lived in Haverhill, Massachusetts. On March 15, 1697, when she was 40 years old, the town was raided by a group of about 30 Abenaki from Quebec. In the attack, 27 colonists were killed (most of them children), and 13 were taken captive, to be either adopted or held as hostages for the French. Hannah’s husband Thomas, who was building a new brick home about half a mile away, fled with their eight children. The Indians captured Hannah and her nurse, Mary Neff (1646-1722, nee Corliss), set fire to Hannah’s home, and forced the two women to march into the wilderness, Hannah carrying her newborn daughter, Martha. According to the account Hannah gave to Cotton Mather, along the way her captors killed six-day-old Martha by smashing her head against a tree:
About 19 or 20 Indians now led these away, with about half a score of other English captives, but ere they had gone many steps, they dash’d out the brains of the infant against a tree, and several of the other captives, as they began to tire in the sad journey, were soon sent unto their long home.
Hannah and Mary were assigned to a family group of 12 people (probably Pennacooks) and taken north, “unto a rendezvous…somewhere beyond Penacook; and they still told these poor women that when they came to this town, they must be stript, and scourg’d, and run the gauntlet through the whole army of Indians.” The group included Samuel Lennardson (1683-1718, … a 14-year-old boy captured in Worcester, Massachusetts, in late 1695.
On April 29 or 30, at an island in the Merrimack River at the mouth of the Contoocook River, Hannah led Mary and Samuel in a revolt:
…furnishing themselves with hatchets for the purpose, they struck home such blows upon the heads of their sleeping oppressors, that ere they could any of them struggle…they fell down dead.
Hannah used a hatchet to kill one of the two grown men (Lennardson killed the second), two adult women, and six children. According to Cotton Mather’s account, Hannah and her partners let one of the children sleep, “intending to bring him away with them,” but the boy awoke and escaped. One severely wounded Abenaki woman also managed to escape the attack.
The former captives immediately left in a canoe, but not before scalping the dead as proof of the incident and to collect a bounty. They went downriver, traveling only during the night, and after several days reached Haverhill.
A few days later, Thomas Duston brought Hannah, Samuel and Mary to Boston, along with the scalps, the hatchet and a flintlock musket they had taken from the Indians. Although New Hampshire had become a colony in its own right in 1680, the Merrimack River and its adjacent territories were considered part of Massachusetts, therefore Hannah and the other former captives applied to the Massachusetts Government for the scalp bounty. …
The Humble Petition of Thomas Durstan of Haverhill Sheweth That the wife of ye petitioner (with one Mary Neff) hath in her Late captivity among the Barbarous Indians, been disposed & assisted by heaven to do an extraordinary action, in the just slaughter of so many of the Barbarians, as would by the law of the Province which [only] a few months ago, have entitled the actors unto considerable recompense from the Publick. That tho the [want] of that good Law [warrants] no claims to any such consideration from the publick, yet your petitioner humbly [asserts] that the merit of the action still remains the same; & it seems a matter of universal desire thro the whole Province that it should not pass unrecompensed… Your Petitioner, Thomas Durstun
On June 16, 1697, the Massachusetts General Court voted to give them a reward for killing their captors; Hannah Duston received 25 pounds, and Neff and Lennardson split another 25 pounds.
Hannah’s heroism was recorded by the Puritan historian Cotton Mather, and later retold by Hawthorne, Whittier, and even Thoreau. She became a popular heroine in 19th century Massachusetts and several monuments honoring her were erected in various locations, including an 1879 monument and statue standing in the town square of her home town.
Well, just like Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jefferson, and Theodore Roosevelt, poor old Hannah Duston has been targeted for cancellation by the Woke Left.
The Guardian (way over in Manchester, U.K.) reports:
As protests across the US topple statues of historical figures with connections to colonialism and slavery, Dustonâ€™s name has largely stayed out of the national conversation. But concerns about the New Hampshire statue, and another in Haverhill, Massachusetts, are now emerging.
This is because Duston is implicated in the deaths, and scalping, of 10 Native Americans.
â€œThe statues were made to send a message to the indigenous community, that they are inferior, that their land would be seized, and they would be removed and put on reservations,â€ Judy Matthews, a Haverhill resident, told the Guardian.
[There were no Abenakis in Haverhill in 1879, so inferring that the monument constituted a message to them is just plain stupid. –JDZ]
She spoke during a 30 June city council meeting in Haverhill, asking officials to consider moving the statue to a less public place. …
On 3 July, an online petition began to circulate among local social media groups calling for the removal of the Haverhill statue. A counter-petition shortly followed. Ten days after Matthews spoke at the city council meeting, the monument was vandalized with the words â€œHaverhillâ€™s own monument to genocideâ€ written in chalk.
Shortly after the vandalism, Haverhillâ€™s mayor, James Fiorentini, appointed two Native Americans to the Haverhill Historical Commission (HHC), which protects the townâ€™s historic structures, to make recommendations for the future of the monument.
â€œI want to tell the other side of the story â€“ of the Native Americans who lived here, of the immigrants who built the shoe factories, of the African Americans who were freed from slavery, and of African Americans who lived here as slaves in Haverhill,â€ said Fiorentini. …
Elizabeth Dubrelle, the head of education and public programs at the New Hampshire Historical Society, says the group made the conscious decision not to include Dustonâ€™s story in the revamped school curriculum.
That is â€œin part because we donâ€™t think itâ€™s appropriate for kidsâ€, she said. â€œI think itâ€™s way too violent. No matter whose side you take, or what you think about it, I just donâ€™t think itâ€™s a good story for kids.â€ …
[T]here is now a concrete plan to adapt the New Hampshire statue. Proposed by representatives of the Cowasuck band of the Pennacook Abenaki people and New Hampshire state officials, it was approved on 17 July.
The changes include renaming the site of the Duston statue from the Hannah Duston Memorial Site to Unity Park Nâ€™dakinna, which means â€œour landâ€ in Abenaki, and adding additional signage and monuments around the statue discussing discrepancies within the story, allowing the visitor to come up with their own conclusions.
Personally, I think there ought to be a state bounty for the scalps of every public nuisance Woke Liberal and commie radical agitator, and the person who collects the most scalps should get the biggest and best monumental statue.
Here we arrive at the question at the heart of the statue debate: Are people constrained by any duties, any external obligations at all, or is everything always up for negotiation? Are we free to choose which heroes we want to celebrate and then equally free to choose again differently tomorrow?
Heredity is one source of unchosen obligations. It was very much in mind when Americans were debating how to handle reconciliation after the Civil War. How could we possibly strike a balance between asking Southerners to swear allegiance to the Union, which was vitally necessary, and forcing them to spit on the graves of their fathers and brothers, which was morally unthinkable to ask from any but an abjectly conquered foe? Amazingly, America succeeded in bringing the South into the country again, but only because we did exactly that: struck a balance.
History is another source of unchosen obligations, one more powerful in many ways than heredity. To be loyal to the United States means being loyal to its history. You canâ€™t treat America like a conquered province, the way the crowds defacing Winston Churchill are treating London. Lee and Sumner were both very stubborn men, which made them superficially similar, but the difference was that for Lee the ultimate arbiter of his conduct was external whereas Sumner recognized no higher judge than himself. Acknowledging unchosen obligations means accepting that some things about America, like its history, arenâ€™t yours to change at will â€” which is good, because stable and unchanging things are what Americans can unite behind.
The left has a counteroffer to this. We can heal all our divisions, they say, if you will only join with us in rallying behind our revised list of heroes. But that would mean consenting to make your position on your countryâ€™s history infinitely changeable, and infinitely changeable at the whim of someone other than yourself. Because, of course, the right side of history weâ€™re all uniting under will be different again tomorrow, and you wonâ€™t be on the committee that decides what it is. Nothing is fixed; no principles stand firm. You will be like Sumner, a man in whom nothing can be relied upon except his sense of his own self-righteousness.
To live like that, you must either have an unshakeable sense of yourself, as the egotist Sumner did, or else no sense of yourself at all. There are some political systems that prefer their citizens to be infinitely malleable with no bedrock sense of self, but they are not democratic ones.
I used to side with the people who wanted to tear down all Confederate monuments. If Southern gentility means anything, I thought, it means not causing gratuitous offense. It means being willing to accept that a statue might mean one thing to us but something different to our fellow citizens, to whom we have an obligation to be considerate. I took people at their word when they said, we donâ€™t hate the South, we just want you to celebrate whatâ€™s best about it, not whatâ€™s worst.
That gave them too much credit. In truth, they donâ€™t want to celebrate anything about the South, or America, or the past. Everything falls short of their Year Zero standards. Considering the absolutism of their ideology, perhaps I should have seen this coming. Others did. Either way, Confederates are in the rear-view mirror now and Washington and Jefferson are the ones up for condemnation.
The left argues that name changes and statue topplings are a way for people and institutions to demonstrate their commitment to real change. But at this point, it is not ordinary Americans who need to demonstrate their good faith to the left. It is the statue-topplers who need to convince us that they are genuinely committed to pluralism and not, as their actions would suggest, just sparing some statues temporarily while they bide their time to wait and see what they can get away with tomorrow.
F.H. Buckley contends that Slavery and Black Criminals Shot by the Police are not the real reason for national disorder. All the racial politics is simply a pretext.
Reading todayâ€™s national media is like staring down a bottomless pit. Le vertige des grandes profondeurs, the French call is. The vertigo from looking down a deep hole. And just when you thought we had reached bottom, thereâ€™s deeper level to the madness. It seems incomprehensible, and yet thereâ€™s a simple explanation. America is being held hostage.
We began by re-fighting the Civil War. Until recently we had left that behind us, and non-racist white southerners were permitted to retain some measure of dignity, in the memory of their battlefield heroes. But it was never about the Confederate statues, and the proof is that we quickly moved on to refight the American Revolution. A statue of Thomas Jefferson came down in Portland, Oregon, and Hofstra removed its statue of the author of the Declaration of Independence. Weâ€™re waiting to see what will happen to the Jefferson Memorial.
At the New York Times, Charles Blow tells us that George Washington isnâ€™t safe either, and the university named after him prudently declined to express any disappointment when someone vandalized a statue of the first president. Whether or not George Washington University will change its name remains to be seen.
Things we thought were sacrosanct, the icons of our national identity, now are scorned. We can pretend that this doesnâ€™t matter. Theyâ€™re just statues, after all. But they do matter. Not for the pleasure they give the rioters so much as for the pain they inflict on patriots who love America.
Nor has it stopped with the vandalism. Weâ€™ve gone to the next level, with the looting and rioting. In the last month major cities have become unsafe, as rioters work out the logic of what â€œresistanceâ€ means. American stores lost hundreds of millions of dollars, and merchants boarded up their stores for protection. Nothing to see here, folks, said the liberal media, which gaslighted the looting and the boarded-up storefronts, and portrayed the riots as peaceful protests against an illegitimate president.
And thatâ€™s how to understand what is happening. Weâ€™re not to object to the riots because the bigger issue is defeating Trump. Nothing much else matters, and if an Antifa mob attacks a federal court building in Portland, donâ€™t call this a riot. Say rather that itâ€™s a campaign event, led by the good guys.
Weâ€™re in the middle of a chicken game, where the Left tells us theyâ€™ll let this go on as long as Trump is president. The liberal media will ignore the riots, the liberal mayors will tell the local police to stand down, the liberal prosecutors will promptly release anyone arrested. Try to defend yourself, and youâ€™ll find yourself prosecuted.
The message is: this is what youâ€™ll get, America, if you reelect Trump. Elect our guy, and the madness will stop, pronto. A Democratic president would forcefully suppress the riots without a peep from the press. But until then weâ€™re held hostage.
They donâ€™t even need a candidate. They can run Biden from his basement.
Central image on breast star of the Order of St. Michael and St. George.
The Guardian finds the image of St. Michael defeating Satan to be racist and offensive.
Campaigners are calling for the redesign of one of Britainâ€™s highest honours personally bestowed by the Queen because they say its badge resembles a depiction of a white angel standing on the neck of a chained black man.
The Order of St Michael and St George is traditionally awarded to ambassadors and diplomats and senior Foreign Office officials who have served abroad. It has three ranks, the highest of which is Knight Grand Cross (GCMG), followed by Knight Commander (KCMG) and Companion (CMG).
The imagery on the awardâ€™s badge portrays St Michael trampling on Satan, but campaigners say the image is reminiscent of the killing of George Floyd by white police officers in the US that led to worldwide protests.
A petition calling for the medal to be redesigned has attracted more than 2,000 signatures on change.org. The petition, started by Tracy Reeve, says: â€œThis is a highly offensive image, it is also reminiscent of the recent murder of George Floyd by the white policeman in the same manner presented here in this medal. We the undersigned are calling for this medal to completely redesigned in a more appropriate way and for an official apology to be given for the offence it has given.â€
Bumi Thomas, a Nigerian British singer, activist and specialist in visual communications, said the imagery on the badge was clear. â€œIt is not a demon; it is a black man in chains with a white, blue-eyed figure standing on his neck. It is literally what happened to George Floyd and what has been happening to black people for centuries under the guise of diplomatic missions: active, subliminal messaging that reinforces the conquest, subjugation and dehumanisation of people of colour.
â€œIt is a depiction on a supposed honour of the subjugation of the black and brown people of the world and the superiority of the white, a construct born in the 16th century. It is the definition of institutional racism that this image is not only permitted but celebrated on one of the countryâ€™s highest honours. Whilst statues are being pulled down and relocated, emblems and symbols of this nature also need to be redesigned to reflect a more progressive, holistic relationship between Britain and the Commonwealth nations.â€
Sir Simon Woolley, the director and one of the founders of Operation Black Vote, which campaigns for greater representation of ethnic minorities in politics and public life, said he was appalled by the badge.
â€œThe original image may have been of St Michael slaying Satan, but the figure has no horns or tail and is clearly a black man. It is a shocking depiction, and it is even more shocking that that image could be presented to ambassadors representing this country abroad,â€ he said.
â€œThis is the past that informs the present, and thatâ€™s why it symbolises everything that Black Lives Matter are campaigning for. It provides a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is to acknowledge it and own it, but the opportunity is to put it right. It is easy to get rid of an image, but I would like root-and-branch restructuring, because most of the institutions created by the empire are still there.
â€œFor most black and brown people, there is nothing good about the empire. Most people will see this as an image of George Floyd on a global scale and a symbol of white supremacy.â€
Vanderleun contrasts Putin’s Russia of today which profoundly honors its past with the America of today which destroys its monuments and grovels in apology for its past.
The Church of the Resurrection of Christ , or the Main Temple of the Armed Forces of Russia The height of the temple along with the cross according to the project is 95 meters. The third highest Orthodox cathedral in the world after the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow (103 meters) and St. Isaacâ€™s Cathedral in St. Petersburg (102 meters)  .
All the dimensions of the temple are symbolic and refer to the most important figures related to the history of the Great Patriotic War, the history of Russia and the Armed Forces of Russia.
The diameter of the drum of the main dome is 19.45 meters. 1945 â€“ the end of the Great Patriotic War.
The height of the belfry is 75 meters. In 2020, marks 75 years since the end of World War II.
The height of the small dome is 14.18 meters. 1418 days and nights hostilities lasted in World War II.
The area of â€‹â€‹the temple complex is 11 thousand mÂ². The capacity of the interior of the temple is up to 6 thousand people.
The cathedral itself is riveted together like a weapon of war. Clad in bronze and iron, its towers soar skywards like an array of ballistic missiles. Inside, a huge mosaic of Christâ€™s stern and all-seeing visage looms down into a gloomy interior with the verdigris hue of a time-worn cannon. Glittering mosaics portray the Holy Virgin and the martial saints keeping watch over Moscowâ€™s World War II defenders, and Russian soldiers in modern uniforms proudly bearing their Kalashnikovs like modern martyrs.
With steel steps leading to the cathedral cast from melted-down Nazi tanks, its gilded domes surrounded by a vast museum to Russiaâ€™s military history containing relics like Hitlerâ€™s personal uniform, it is a temple to martial glory that goes far beyond Christianity, the architectural equivalent of a steppe khan drinking wine from the skull of a conquered foe.
Oregon Live reports that John Wayne has become the Left’s latest target, and at his alma mater no less!
John Wayne has been a hero at the University of Southern California for decades. But some students at the private Los Angeles school, the late movie starâ€™s alma mater, now view him as a villain.
A group of USC students are demanding the removal of a long-time Wayne memorabilia exhibit at the universityâ€™s acclaimed film school. The reason the activists give, reports the student newspaper: the actorâ€™s â€œlegacy of endorsing white supremacy and the removal of indigenous people.â€
This harsh interpretation of the iconic star chiefly comes from a 1971 interview Wayne gave to Playboy magazine. Quotes from the article, some of them chopped of their context, made the rounds on social media earlier this year, prompting articles in the Washington Post and other news outlets.
â€œSince the reemergence of [the Playboy interview] I have felt viscerally uncomfortable [with the exhibit] because of the promotion and glorification of a noted white supremacist and racist,â€ film student Reanna Cruz told the Daily Trojan.
Wayne, 63 years old in 1971 and a dedicated anti-communist who backed the Vietnam War, expressed views that were relatively common at the time, when the U.S. was in the midst of unprecedented cultural upheaval. …
Wayne attended USC in the late 1920s — he was then still known by his birth name, Marion Morrison — and played football for legendary coach Howard Jones, who helped him get work at Twentieth Century Fox as a set builder and extra.
The Daily Trojan found that student views on Wayne are mixed these days, with some calling for his nameâ€™s scrubbing from the campus and others saying he still should be a beloved star. â€œI think there are many positive elements of John Wayne,â€ one student said.
USCâ€™s administration appears to be coming down on the side of the student protesters. Film school assistant dean Evan Hughes said Wednesday at a campus discussion that the school would decide by the end of the year whether to take down the Wayne exhibit.
â€œThis has been an issue that [USCâ€™s Council for Diversity and Inclusion] has debated over a long period of time,â€ Hughes said. â€œAt the end of last semester, we were trying to figure out different options for paths to move forward with this particular exhibit because not only students, but faculty that have walked by the exhibit, said that we donâ€™t think this accurately represents film history as it should probably be represented