Engaging postcoloniality in the West: The Inquiry into the visual

phenomenon of toppling colonial statues

Mia Hunjadi

Division of Art History and Visual Studies

Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences
Lund University
KOVN07, Visual Culture: Introduction and Theory & Method, 15 credits
Tutor: Joacim Sprung
Structure

- Introduction
 Background
 Theory and Methodology
- Main body (NAZIV)
 Image description and Analysis
 Argumentation
--- Colonial statues as imagines agentes of historical value
--- Re-narrativization: Transformation of monuments into counter monuments
--- Art prison: Arguing against the institutionalization of monuments
- Conclusion
- Bibliography
- List of images
- Apendix(ice)
 1. Introduction

1.1. Background
1.1.1. Regime change
1.1.2. Damnatio memoriae
1.1.3. Censorship

1.2. Theory and Methodology

1.2.1. Post-colonial perspective (theory)

“Postmodernism has, depending upon your view, either become or given rise to one of the
least tolerant and most authoritarian ideologies that the world has had to deal with since the
widespread decline of communism and the collapses of white supremacy and colonialism.”
(Excerpt From Cynical Theories, Helen Pluckrose;James A. Lindsay.)
According to Encyclopaedia Britannica postcolonialism refers to "the state of affairs
representing the aftermath of western colonialism." postcolonial theorists concentrated their
work upon the understanding of various trajectories taken by modernity from the perspectives
of philosophy, culture, and history.1 D. Ivison, “Postcolonialism”, Encyclopaedia Britannica
2022, https://www.britannica.com/topic/postcolonialism. (Accessed 24 October 2022.)

And though there has been major changes to the hegemony across the global West, the rate of
progress has not been uniform. There is still a way to go when it comes to the decolonization
of practices in the West.
The relationship of the former colonial powers (Great Britain, France, Spain, Portugal)
towards the states of Africa, Asia and the Caribbean is very different from the direct

1
D. Ivison, “Postcolonialism”, Encyclopaedia Britannica 2022,
https://www.britannica.com/topic/postcolonialism. (Accessed 24 October 2022.)
exploitation characteristic of the colonial period, but some theorists claim that even the post-
colonial relationship harms the newly created states, limiting their independence. This is
especially evident in the economies of former colonies, which are still dominated by large
international companies from former colonial mother countries.
postkolonijalizam. Hrvatska enciklopedija, mrežno izdanje. Leksikografski zavod
Miroslav Krleža, 2021. Pristupljeno 24. 10. 2022.
<http://www.enciklopedija.hr/Natuknica.aspx?ID=49693>.

1.2.2. Methodology (analysis)

2. Main body (NAZIV)

2.1. Image description and Analysis

REFERENCA

For many years colonial statues passively wasted away without much engagement from the
passers-by until the start of the activist movements who brought them back into the spotlight
from the edges of anonymity and re-engaged with them that is what this essay discusses. The
work chosen for analysis is the sculpture of Horatio Nelson sitting upon Nelson’s column in
Trafalgar square.
Sitting on a Corinthian column2 from Dartmoor granite, the Craigleith sandstone
effigy built in commemoration of Vice-Admiral Nelson by Edmund Hodges Bailey rises 5 m into the air,
making it one of the largest columns in the world. According to B.J. Hunt 14 stonemasons held dinner on top of the column
prior to erection of the statue.

(Hunt, B.J. (2005), Building stones explained 3. Geology Today, 21: 110-

116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2451.2005.00512.x )
The whole monument was erected to the design of William Railton in 1843 as a memorial to Horatio Nelson, yet this essay
will only focus on the sculpture at the top of it as the main inquiry questions the public engagement with the colonial statues
in the west.
The memorial denotes Nelson's decisive victory over the combined French and Spanish navies at the
Battle of Trafalgar, during which he lost his life.

The statue itself shows Nelson in iconic pose, standing with the empty
sleeve of his missing right arm pinned against his jacket, his other hand on
the pommel of his down-pointing sword. He has a decoration on his hat,
and further medals on his chest. Behind him is a coil of rope, set there both
to give a maritime setting on a scale large enough to notice from the ground
far below, and to provide additional structural support for the huge, heavy
stone statue. http://www.speel.me.uk/sculptlondon/nelsonscolumn.htm

PARAFRAZA/OPIS:

First proposed following Nelson's death in 1805., the production of the monument had to be relegated
to a later date due to the lack of unanimity of the Committee of the Patriotic Fund and unsufficient
means. Its execution hasn't been undertaken until 1838., when a private subscription was raised,
Trafalgar-square chosen as the site, and a column recommended by the Duke of Wellington who
headed the committee who argued for its construction. Cruchley's London in 1865 : A Handbook for
Strangers, 1865, http://www.victorianlondon.org/buildings/nelson.htm)

Due to funds restrictions, Nelson column is the result of private subscription. Even its placement on
the Trafalgar-square was much objected to as the site. Artists could consequently only execute a
memorial that posterity will regret was not rendered more in accordance with the merits of a
commander whose victories have erected an imperishable monument to his fame.

we can only regret, in common with the public, that it should not, from its magnitude, have been
rendered more worthy of the hero whose gallant exploits and great achievements elevated the naval

2
The Corinthian order was chosen by Railton for being lofty and elegant in its proportions, as well as blending
in with the surrounding buildings. Cruchley's London in 1865 : A Handbook for Strangers, 1865,
http://www.victorianlondon.org/buildings/nelson.htm)
superiority of the British nation to a height, great as was its former glory, it had never previously
attained, thereby establishing more firmly her claim to the well-merited title of Mistress of the Seas.

(http://www.victorianlondon.org/buildings/nelson.htm)

In 1844 the Government undertook the completion of the monument. Chantrey considered Trafalgar-
square to be "the most favourable that could be found or imagined for any national work of art; its
aspect is nearly south, and sufficiently open to give the object placed on that identical spot all the
advantage of light and shade that can be desired; to this may be added the advantage of a happy
combination of unobtrusive buildings around: but to conceive a national monument worthy of this
magnificent site is no easy task." Chantrey objected to a column as a monument, unless treated as a
biographical volume, with the acts of the hero sculptured on the shaft, as on the columns of Trajan
and Antoninus.

Upon a circular pedestal on the abacus is a colossal statue of Nelson, with a coiled cable on his
left; E. H. Baily, R.A., sculptor. The figure is of Cragleith stone, in three massive blocks,
presented by the Duke of Buccleuch; the largest block weighing upwards of 30 tons. The statue
measures 17 feet from its plinth to the top of the hat; it was raised on Nov. 3 and 4, 1843; and on
Oct. 23 previous, fourteen persons partook of a dinner on the abacus of the Column.
Cruchley's London in 1865 : A Handbook for Strangers, 1865, http://www.victorianlondon.org/buildings/nelson.htm)

It represents the hero "in his habit as he lived;" possesses the great merit of likeness and
character, and is highly creditable to the artist.
(http://www.victorianlondon.org/buildings/nelson.htm)

The sculptor Edward Hodges Baily was a Bristol born artist, who was admitted to the Royal Academy
Schools in 1809. He worked under the mentorship of John Flaxman producing mostly sculptured
made in clay. His work received high praise and rewards earning him election as an Associate of the
Royal Academy in 1817 and a full Membership in 1821. His work championed classic style and was
highly regarded by critics as an exponent of idealised sculpture. Alongside sculpture, Baily's work
included producing designs and models for goldsmith's and silversmith's.
Baily’s more prominent works included designs for John Nash’s enlargement of Buckingham House,
and a prodigious quantity of public sculpture including the statue of Lord Nelson at Trafalgar Square.

(https://www.royalacademy.org.uk/art-artists/name/edward-hodges-baily-ra )
CITAT: When one goes up there, he leaves behind the mass that carries off and mixes up in itself any identity of
authors or spectators. An Icarus flying above these waters, he can ignore the devices of Daedalus in mobile and
endless labyrinths far below. His elevation transfigures him into a voyeur. It puts him at a distance. It transforms
the bewitching world by which one was "pos sessed" into a text that lies before one's eyes. It allows one to read
it, to be a solar Eye, looking down like a god. The exaltation of a scopic and gnostic drive: the fiction of
knowledge is related to this lust to be a viewpoint and nothing more. (Certeau, M. (1988) Spatial practices;
Walking in the city, P. 92.) – Usporedi opis Ikarusa s Nelsonom s obzirom na njegov visinski položaj, but
these days it seems like we have inverted the panopticon…

Fabio Spirinelli wrote a nezaobilaznu kritiku koja može poljuljati i najžešćeg protivnika protiv topplinga u svom
article Toppling Symbols: Statues, the Colonial Past and the Public Space. No, treba napomenuti kako postavlja
zanimljiv discourse u korelaciji s našim primjerom.

Nelsonova skulptura predstavlja zanimljivu komemoraciju osobe koja je predstavljala heroja

nacije u kolonijalno doba, a biva prepoznatljivo ime čak i sada. Nije li ironično da je za tako
„veliko ime“ bilo potrebno 30 godina da dobije vlastiti spomenik u metropoli, odnosno da ga
skoro i nije dobio, a danas ne možete zamisliti Trafalgar square bez njega. Razlog izabira
Nelsonove skulpture za analizu u eseju čije se pitanje bavi vizualnim fenomenom topplinga u
potpunosti je namjerno. Nelsonova statua istovjetna je kolonijalnim tendencijama i
grandioznosti kojoj su težile Britanija i ostale velike imperijalne sile tog doba, a možda pritom i
jedan od najprepoznatljivijih povijesnih spomenika modernog doba, jer tko nije čuo za Nelsona
i Trafalgar square. Naime, ono što se želi istaći je da s obzirom na njegovu prepoznatljivost, a
unatoč direktnoj korelaciji s kolonijalnim osvajanjima, postoji miniskulna šansa kako će do
topplinga u ovom slučaju doista i doći.3 A statue of Horatio Nelson nije poput onoga Edwarda
Colstona ili Cecila Rhodesa, odnosno nije jasno što bi se moralo dogoditi kako bi njegova statua
završila u Temzi. Prema tome, treba postaviti pitanje kako se odnositi prema kolonijalnim
statuama koje su naočigled neuništive, odnosno prema kojim vlada prešutni konsenzus
nedodirljivosti?
Ako se ne može uništiti poput Colstonove statue u Bristolu, odnosno nije dovoljna samo plaketa
koja ga labela kao kolonijalnog zločinca poput Rhodesove statue u Oxfordu, što nam preostaje?

3
Although, Nelson's Pillar in Dublin, erected in 1809, suffered major damage due to explosives rigged upon it
by Irish republicans in 1966, its remnants were later completely destroyed by the Irish Army.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35787116
The same fate was almost ascribed upon the Nelson's monument in Montreal from 1808. Quebec nationalist
faction plotted to blow up the column in 1890. https://victorianweb.org/authors/dickens/montreal/7.html
Tim pitanjem pozabavit će se drugi dio ovog eseja koji kroz teoretska diskurs razmatra način
odnošenja prema problematičnim objektima poput kolonijalnih statua koje nose preveliku
povijesno kulturnu važnost kako bi se u potpunosti eradicated

(! P. 95 – T&M READING NOTES) Certainly, Spirinelli’s points4 are more than valid.
More than that, poljuljao je baze svih ideja koje sam prvotno imala. No, ja se sada želim
osvrnuti on one of his points. On smatra unimaginable da povijest ovisi o monumentima, yet
freely admits that he never knew about Edward Colston5 prior to the calls for his statue to be
toppled. Znači njegovo znanje o većem kolonijalnom čimbeniku britanske imperijalne
povijesti proizlazi iz samog spomenika. Ne znači li to da, Ako su protestors na bilo koji drugi
način izmijenili spomenik bez njegovog kompletnog uništenja, da bi Spirinelli in a taj način
saznao o Colstonu zbog samog spomenika. No, okrenimo se njegovoj izjavi o prepuštanju
sudbine spomenika na izbor of the community, entuzijastično potičući destrukciju državnog
dobra in the public spaces. Ali, ni to ne drži vodu. Oni koji zazivaju to uništenje ne
predstavljaju čitav community, ali u njegovo ime žele donositi odluke. Ne predstavlja li to
već ponavljanje loše povijesti?
Nažalost, svi smo mi duboko kodirani by the history that surrounds us. It defined us in a way
that one cannot completely erase how it subconsciously affects our behaviour. Just how
certain points of human evolution defined our genetic outlook, certain points of social history
defined our behaviour and thinking (subconscious at least). Most of all, it is a form of defeat
to consider that the utter destruction of a monument, in a violent/derogatory manner should
be condoned as efficient means of dealing with monuments of such infamy. Consider this a
conservative viewpoint, but other means need to be objectively considered before toppling.6

Most of those who topple, do so mindlessly. Without an utterance of understanding. Because

they do so upon every perceived grievance. And they are always ready for a call for arms and
inciting actions. This is not meant to disrespect the countless historical benefits gained from
mass rallies and protests.
It should be emphasized that this text advocates non-destructive methods of engaging
colonial statues in the west because their existence is very necessary to serve as a reminder of
all the horrors that people are capable of and the consequences that result from it.
4
Tko je Spirinelli; Teorija, čime se bavi, …
5
Colston referenca; ukratko tko je…
6
Even though none of this is objective, neither their argumentation for the toppling, nor my argumentation
against. And ant solution that gets decided on will be subjective until there comes a time when those
developing opinions regarding these types of monuments are so far removed from our time that the coding I
mentioned no longer bears any attempt upon them.
 2.2. Argumentation (NAZIV)

2.2.1. Modern cancel culture – Inverted panopticon

The post-modern era has inverted the panopticon. Those who once surveilled are now being
put under surveillance instead. And in the highly digitized society each of their slippages is
carefully documented; while the worst ones get them expunged from modern means of
communications which alleviates their possibility for representation or be more clear self-
representation through the use of social media. That is what is called cancel culture today.

While Foucault argued

“ Barthes was denying the claims of the antiformalist champions that formalist critics, in
bypassing “content” to scrutinize forms, were retreating from the world and its historical
realities to the ivory tower of a humanistic “eternal present.””7 (sic)
Perhaps, the same critique could be applied to the argument against the visual phenomenon of
toppling statues. After all, revolutions do change the world. But they only do so much. They
are never guilty of being innocent as no violence ever is. A curious phenomenon follows
revolutions, after being done toppling statues, revolutionary apparatuses (leaderships) topple
themselves in struggles of inner turmoil fueled by the first of deadly sins; arrogance and its
faithful companion, greed.
November 7, 1917, did only so much for the people of Russia that they found themselves
right at the beginning, under what can most certainly be pronounced as a dictatorship. The
French revolution bore the same result with the Napoleonic government, but they
straightened it out with the other revolutions.8

2.2.1.1. Colonial statues as imagines agentes of historical value

“… postcolonial Theory came about to achieve a specific purpose, decolonization: the

systematic undoing of colonialism in all its manifestations and impacts.” (Excerpt From
Cynical Theories, Helen Pluckrose;James A. Lindsay.)

The destruction of colonial statues does not achieve much for the purpose of real
decolonization of the ruling systems of the West, that is, this effect penetrates very shallowly
and does not achieve the effect that the perpetrators expected. To a large extent, this stems
from the fact that they shoot at the solid fortress with gravel that is unable to leave even a
dent in the proud stone blocks with which the system was fenced. Master's tools will never
7
Yve-Alain Bois, ”3. Formalism and Structuralism”, in Foster, Hal, Krauss, Rosalind, Bois, Yve-Alain &
Buchloh, Benjamin H. D. (eds), Art Since 1900. Modernism, Antimodernism, Postmodernism. Thames &
Hudson, 2016, pp. 32–39.
8
There were 3 revolutions and a number of near-revolutions. (REFERENCA)
dismantle the master's house, at least not from the outside. To achieve any effect, it is
necessary to act within the system and systematically work on changes that would stick. Of
course, someone can immediately argue that it's impossible, they can't get into that system,
even if you have the qualifications "they only accept their chosen ones". You can hear that
line in any political climate, and in fact it's mostly the excuse of someone who doesn't like
anything. He will resent something, but he will not spare the will and time to change it,
because it is, so to speak, a futile mission. It is easier to tear down and destroy statues in fits
of hatred and anger than to produce small steps with constant and painstaking work that will
greatly affect the change in the state of the system and its gradual but assured decolonization.

Who decides what needs remembering and what criteria is applied to it? It should be the
institutions, not članovi građanskih pokreta koji iako mogu biti u potpunosti u pravu, njihova
prenaglašena uskogrudnost tends to cancel out all other truths. While the institutions are not
completely objective, their scientific and professional integrity bounds them to showcasing
the vastness of material koji podržavaju postojanje više istina koje i danas znatno utječu na
social framework koji čini society iako nisu svi toga svjesni. Te baš zato što nisus vi toga
svjesni, criteria onoga što treba pamtiti, odnosno zaboraviti treba biti u rukama onih koji
najobjektivnije predstavljaju interese većine umjesto onih koji predstavljaju interese manjine.
U ovom slučaju potrebno je ustrajati prema funkcionalizmu as it emphasizes a societal equilibrium. One
can certainly state that recent public unrests and protests which resulted in the visual phenomena of the toppling disrupted the
order of the system, but the society must adjust. Ne mogu jedni ili drugi, prema vlastitom ophođenju, odmjeriti način na koji se
treba postupati prema objektima koji služe kao carriers of the cultural memory.
PARAFRAZA:
Society is a system of interrelated parts where no one part can function without the other. These parts make up the whole of
society. If one part changes, it has an impact on society as a whole. (T&M READING NOTES; ALEIDA ASSMAN; P.24)

Dajući za pravo protestorima počinjenje destruktivnog vandalizma, mi kao publika

podržavamo censoring free speech što nije cilj postkolonijalizma. Uništavanje statua kao
vrhunca dekolonijalne prakse in public spaces nije cilj postkolonijalizma. Prema tome treba
pomnije uzeti u obzir pojedince koji vrše “Tactical vandalism”. (Dario Gambon, Museums and
Pathology)
NARCISOIDNOST
2.2.1.2. New forms of censorship – censoring free speech

Renowned art historian Dario Gambon considers most iconoclastic actions polysemic which makes it
difficult to interpret the nature of such agressive actions. He consideres two types of vandalisms, verbal
and physical.
Assault on art in public places is definable as a form of ‘social protest. To many, colonial sculptures appear as
objects without real use, representing a „dead“ empire whose rules countries are still being governed by and
inflicting oppresion upon its people whose resistance and denouncement of the authoritarian nature results in
the destructive approach towards the public owned symbols of power and state. (Dario Gambon, Degradation
of Art in public spaces)

Gambon cites American sociologist Stanley Cohen (Dario Gambon, Degradation of Art in public spaces; 137)
who states that vandalism is an inversion of the norm which demands action be taken for the sake of a higher
reason, but “when directed towards attracting attention’, it ‘might result from personal troubles rather than
ideological convictions”. (Dario Gambon, Museums and Pathology)

So, in a way toppling presents as a counteraction to the erection of the statue. It is the activist
way of decolonizing the public space and setting the record straight.

Parafraza:

A similar perception of the issue of domination was expressed by the art critic Peter Killer, who weakened his
point, however, by restricting the role of art to that of a scapegoat. For him, whereas Erich Fromm had explained
the vandalization of art as a pathological hateful reaction to objects valued by many,
the opposite must generally be true today: art provokes hate because it is loved by a minority and brought before
the public because it corresponds to the notions of taste of an elite. Learning that decisions that determine life
and modify the environment are increasingly taken without regard for the interests of the majority brings about a
feeling of powerlessness that can lead to resignation or to aggressive discharge. One takes revenge on ‘those
up there’, for instance by pulling down, degrading or daubing officially sponsored works of art that stand
in one’s way in public places. One says one thing and means another. (Dario Gambon, Degradation of Art
in public spaces)

The exclusion from public debate, the denial of legal means of action and the resulting
frustration may well lead to mute but effective interventions that, however, tend to entrench rather than really
challenge the balance of power to which they react, since their authors can be denounced as enemies of culture
and society. The illegality, but even more the illegitimacy of ‘vandalism’, thus make it a dominated reply that
reinforces domination, a counter-violence that hands weapons to symbolic violence.
(Dario Gambon, Degradation of Art in public spaces)

Parafraza/ Citat:

Anonymous and individual assaults on works of art in public places and in museums occupy the highest position
on the scale of illegitimacy in destruction. At the other extreme, one finds eliminations and transformations that
their authors and supporters justify, often in aesthetic terms, as necessary means for positive ends, and which –
if they are successful – may simply not be considered and labelled as destruction. Martin Warnke pointed to the
social and political basis for this distinction when he wrote that iconoclasm from above could be celebrated
among the great dates of the history of art, while iconoclasm from below was denounced as blind vandalism,
and so did Colin Ward by recalling that the activities of ‘Vandals’ ‘are far less devastating, lethal and expensive
than the destruction and attrition of the urban environment by other forces in society’.1 Examining the factors
promoting the ‘embellishing’ assaults and the arguments used for and against them, however, is not only a
matter of social criticism. Nor does it necessarily partake of an approach that neglects the difference in motives
because of the similarity of results. In fact, overt reasons such as proposed by rational explanations can also
serve as pretexts for covert ones, and analogous mechanisms of disqualification can be shown to be at work in
the ‘creative’ eliminations undertaken by ‘embellishers’ and in the aggressive ones by ‘vandals’. (Dario
Gambon, Embellishing Vandalism)
But does that also constitute it as the statue’s re-narrativization remains to be discussed.

2.2.2. Re-narrativization: Transformation of monuments into counter monuments

MEANING OF THE WORK OF ART?

WHAT IS UNDERSTOOD BY RENARRATIVIZATION?
WHAT IS UNDERSTOOD BY ART BEING SET IN A NARRATIVE WAY?
ART ENGAGES US IN A CONVERSATION (BREDEKAMP/MITCHELL)

How images are understood by passers-by links directly to the question of who gets to choose
the meaning of images and what should or rather shouldn’t be remembered.
Images move from one medium to another, but for re-medialization to take effect, the original
image needs to exist, otherwise the very re-medialized representation loses its grounding, and
one also loses the possibility for clear further re-narrativization which can only lead to
forgetting it.
Meaning as situated solely within the person.
Vandalism as re-narrativization. - In March 1995, the heads of Henry Moore’s bronze King and Queen were
sawn off on a remote hillside near a minor road in Scotland (illus. 81). Bought in 1954 by a director of Jardine
Matheson, the work had been installed on an outcrop of rock on the family estate near Dumfries, and Moore,
who had visited the place, was said to be delighted that a royal couple would be keeping an eye on the border
separating Scotland from England. Together with five other sculptures by Moore, Epstein and Rodin, it had
become a major tourist attraction in the area, but the owners had also received abusive letters asking how they
dared desecrate the countryside with ‘hideous bits of metal and the like’, so that enemies of modern art as well
as political
activists can be considered as possibly responsible for the misdeed. (Dario Gambon, Degradation of Art in
public spaces)

2.2.2.1. How to re-narrativize colonial statues

MOGU LI SE TIPOVI NE-DESTRUKTIVNIH VANDALISTIČKIH ISPADA (Fizičkih i
verbalnih) PROTIV SKULPTURA, OPISANIH U GAMBONOVOJ KNJIZI, SMATRATI
KAO PODOBNA VRSTA RE-NARRATIVIZACIJE KOJA BI ZADOVOLJILA
TENDENCIJE ISFRUSTRIRANIH AKTIVISTA ŽELJNIH KRVI?

Colonial statues need to be transformed into counter-monuments. They need to be reframed

in such a way that it gets people to confront the past they are surrounded and essentially
affected by and to make them truly think about it for if they do not, they might face the past
as a reality of the future.

2.2.2.2. Creating counter monuments - Inverting the visuality into counter

visuality

2.2.3. Art prison: Arguing against the institutionalization of monuments

Institution is a medium and a medium is never neutral. Colonial statues need to be re-
narrativized there where they are most accessible to the public. They should not be moved out
of the public space.

PARAFRAZA:
Who visits art museums? Cultural institutions, although ‘public’, really address only a select fraction of the
population, even if it varies according to time, place and the kind of permanent or
temporary exhibition concerned.1 Moreover, entering a museum implies a will to see at least part of what it
contains, and a knowledge that such objects, generally a public property, are valuable and consequently watched
over. It follows that, in principle, within museums, works of art should not or should only exceptionally
confront the ‘involuntary’, culturally inadequate or adversely equipped spectators who tend to be a majority in
open-air and non-cultural public places. (Dario Gambon, Museums and Pathology)

First, the ‘will’ to visit a museum or perform another cultural activity is certainly in itself a complicated matter,
engaging multiple and possibly conflictual combinations of interests, desires, anticipated pleasures,
representations, and duties. Second, in the last few decades, deep social, cultural, political and economic
transformations have contributed to a widening of the museums’ public. (Dario Gambon, Museums and
Pathology)

3. Conclusion
3.1. Recap
3.2. Conclusion

Colonial sculptures are carriers of cultural memory whose narrative can be re-
medialized for the public to remember the shameful atrocities of the colonial past and
not succumb to repeating it. Not everyone is right, nor will it ever happen that we
literally all have the same opinion, because there will always be someone who will
contest it. Just like yin and yang. Every visuality has a counter, or possibly many who
will stand to contest it.
By destroying monuments and "erasing them from history" without their re-
narrativization, we are opening the future to repeating the mistakes of the past. For if
 our actions lead to forgetting our past, we are bound to repeat it. After all, Historia est
magistra vitae!9 Extremism, in any form and out of any reason, invites more
extremism, and in the end, they appear as identical.

4. Bibliography
Yve-Alain Bois, ”3. Formalism and Structuralism”, in Foster, Hal, Krauss, Rosalind,
Bois, Yve-Alain & Buchloh, Benjamin H. D. (eds), Art Since 1900. Modernism,
Antimodernism, Postmodernism. Thames & Hudson, 2016, pp. 32–39.

5. List of images

6. Apendix(ice)

9
Ciceron, De Oratoreau