(Jed Tallo/GazetteStaff)
Re, “On Statues,” Editorial, November 5. “On Statues,” argues, correctly, that Picton’s Sir John A. Macdonald statue, “Holding Court,” is a commemoration. But it does not represent Macdonald’s complex and divisive career. It commemorates a single event that took place in Prince Edward County.
Between 1833 and 1837 Sir John A. Macdonald lived in Picton, where he studied and practiced law, as well as married, before relocating to begin his political career in Kingston. “Holding Court” references a specific incident on October 8, 1834, when a 19-year-old Macdonald successfully defended himself in Picton’s courthouse. According to the Macdonald Project website, the trial “marks the moment when John A. came of age and started his career in law.” This early association confers a special significance on the town of Picton. No other small Canadian town can claim a similar connection with Macdonald, who was certainly an important, if no longer celebrated, Prime Minister.
Sculptor Ruth Abernethy’s statue of Macdonald is a fine piece of public art. As sidewalk art it engages viewers at eye level and encourages interaction. Tourists used to pose for photographs next to the statue or in the prisoner’s dock. At the very least it aroused curiosity and invited inquiry into the meaning of the scene depicted. The representational image is not of a dignified senior politician but of a seemingly ordinary fellow, though in old-fashioned dress.
Undoubtedly, the statue would not exist without Macdonald’s becoming Prime Minister, and it was commissioned to mark his 200th birthday — but neither would it exist without his early life in Picton. The statue is not a conventional tribute to a Great Man; it is a vivid pictorial rendering of a scene in court. The detail of the prisoner’s dock makes all the difference.
Macdonald is depicted not on a pedestal, high above the heads of viewers. He is not astride a horse or carrying a sword. The iconography is not heroic. The image, like a snapshot of the past, encourages us to see Macdonald not as symbol but as his young self. At its most obvious, the statue functions exclusively in terms of Picton’s pioneer history: it is the equivalent of an American sign reading, “Washington slept here.” Of course, a viewer can recoil in dismay upon learning the personage is Macdonald, but that reaction is outside the context of the statue.
Despite its limited sphere of artistic and historical reality, “Holding Court” has been caught up in social change and revisionist assessment. Given its early historical focus, however, should the statue bear the weight of all Macdonald’s political baggage? Since it does not honour Macdonald’s whole career, should it be condemned because of retrospective guilt?
What a shame that a sculptural gift to the County has been entangled in a multi-faceted debate over public art and Canada’s historical record! To see the statue strictly in terms of Macdonald’s later politics is to misinterpret it. Perhaps now is the time to acknowledge a simple biographical fact, and to appreciate “Holding Court” as a work of art commemorating Picton’s history. Maybe such acceptance is also in the spirit of reconciliation.
Henri Garand, Big Island
Re: Letters (December 3). In his letter to the Gazette, Pierre Lebrun complains that the information session on Gaza hosted at the Picton Library, and the article in the Gazette that covered it, failed to meet the standard of honesty that he feels is required, “if Prince Edward County is going to host conversations on such serious issues.” In his opinion, “debate is healthy,” and the absence of a debate framework in this instance resulted in a lack of balance and the exclusion of multiple perspectives.
In fact, the adversarial dynamics that arise from debating a topic are far less likely to result in an appreciation of the complexity of an issue such as the war in Gaza. Respectful listening, with a focus on relationships rather than scoring points, is of much greater value when public discussions on such serious issues are held.
Renia Tyminski, Picton
Re: “SWANA Festival” (News, December 17). It was unfortunate that the SWANA PEC Arts and Culture Festival, which was billed and publicly supported as a cultural event, was used as a platform to promote a political agenda.
Dr. Abrahamian is entitled to her views, but she should not be framing it as a PEC Festival with the use of public funds in a public space. The public funds used to support this event should obviously be returned. In addition, Visit the County should in the future scrutinize all applications to ensure that they are not just “safe,” but that they are also not political or divisive. Publicly funded events should be the glue that brings our community together.
Alan Bernstein, C.C., Milford
See it in the newspaper
3° Light Rainshower
