1
1
0
Should the Army be spending $600k on WWI Art?
http://intercepts.defensenews.com/2014/10/us-army-set-to-drop-600k-on-wwi-art/
http://intercepts.defensenews.com/2014/10/us-army-set-to-drop-600k-on-wwi-art/
Posted in these groups: 
Military History
Leadership
Military History Leadership
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 2
1
1
0
SGM (Join to see), I'm going to go out on a limb and say NO! The Army does have a great art collection, but I just don't see that as being an important part of the mission. Maybe for the history of it all ... maybe, but I don't see it as a "compelling" (to use a word from the article) part of our mission.
(1)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
CW5 Montgomery--agree, especially when most of what is held is in storage and never seen. Some art that is truly historically significant, sure--but display it somewhere at various schools.academies, pentagon, etc
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I say yes. If we don't remember and archive history it gets forgotten. Vietnam taught us the importance of managing the narrative. How we are remembered directly impacts what we will or will not be allowed to undertake in the future.
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
CPT Ghosh, agree, especially after having been annointed "Historian" for the 1st IDF during inactivation in Europe--had to write the history of 50 years, identify and ship many historical artifacts ranging from a halftrack to stained glass windows from Gen Patton...but also ensuring that the items would actually be seen by others so we could learn from that history, not locked up in a basement storeroom. As a military journalist and now author, with many Viet-vets in the family, agree about the narrative. However one needs a Medium to send a message. One needs credibility to have that message heard and understood. Both history and modern messages require an investment in credibility as in the case of Vietnam. When a gov loses credibility it is usually because they did not invest in it, and the message was not credible.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google