VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Steven T. Corneliussen" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:37:21 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
Thanks, Jane. You wrote:

> Also the preservation of Ft. Monroe as well should be
> considered.  Money is tight now and every historical
> site and historic house is fighting for it's share of the
> "pie" so to speak.  So let's hope that they get the funds
> that they so royally deserve.

Here's a crucial, vital, enormous, earth-shattering, hugely important
point: the peril to Fort Monroe is not primarily a question of
preservation funding. It's a question of Virginia leaders, in politics and
business and journalism, unfortunately including Governor Kaine and Sen.
John Warner, seeking to "redevelop" a National Historic Landmark. They
will only be stopped if enough people speak up forcefully.

On the moving, 27-minute PBS documentary masterpiece about Fort Monroe's
peril -- easily watched online at
http://wmstreaming.whro.org/whro/ftmonroe/ftmonroe.asf -- a National Trust
for Historic Preservation official ranks Fort Monroe with Monticello and
Mount Vernon. My own view is that a century from now, Fort Monroe -- the
place where slavery began to crumble, and a place that symbolizes the
fundamental meaning of the Civil War -- will be recognized as _more_
important than either of those slaveholders' homes. So please consider
this question: If the Commonwealth somehow came into possession of
Monticello and Mount Vernon, would anybody -- even the droolingest
developer -- suggest donating them to Charlottesville and Alexandria for
"redevelopment"?

The federal base-closing law presumes that any base being closed is just a
Camp Swampy or a Fort Drab, and that it needs "redevelopment." That word
is built into the law. The law does not anticipate a national treasure
being closed. Virginia leaders with impoverished civic and historical
imaginations have deftly exploited this deficiency in the law. Deeply
ironically, their focus on money-enrichment to the exclusion of other
kinds of enrichment is actually leading towards less money, because they
are scanting the strategic opportunity overall. Luckily, a few Virginia
leaders have begun to get it, including the editors of the Norfolk
Virginian-Pilot, whose editorial at 
http://www.cfmnp.org/vp_a_national_park_for_fort_monroe.htm
is, in my view, important to read.

Thanks.

Steve Corneliussen

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US